- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 8,874
Replay is a main focus of NFL rule proposals
• By Jim Thomas
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/foot...cle_b423f0d2-ffa0-5cfb-a223-321200c06aeb.html
It’s not just us. Judging by the nature of 18 rules proposals, many NFL teams aren’t all that pleased with the level of officiating in the league.
To wit, 13 of the 18 proposals submitted for discussion at next week’s NFL owners meetings in Phoenix deal with expanding the instant replay system in one form or another.
The most extreme approach — call it the nuclear approach — comes from our friends in New England. The Patriots have proposed making all plays reviewable other than scoring plays or turnovers. (Scoring plays and turnovers already are subjected to automatic reviews.)
Detroit wants to review all penalties called. Tennessee and Washington have submitted proposals that would have all personal fouls subject to reviews (but in different ways).
Tennessee has a proposal to make penalties called for hitting a defenseless receiver reviewable.
Indianapolis wants fouls on any defenseless player — including peel-back blocks and hits on long snappers — reviewable.
And there’s more.
Tennessee wants to add replay for the game clock at the end of the half, at the end of regulation and at the end of overtime.
Chicago wants the play clock subject to replay, to determine if the ball was snapped in time.
New England chimes in again with a proposal to put fixed cameras on all boundaries of the playing field — sidelines, goal line, back of the end zone — thus making it consistent at all venues, and have it available for all replays.
And Washington feels there just aren’t enough replay challenges. The team with the controversial nickname has proposed that each team should be allowed three coaching challenges instead of two.
For a league obsessed with the length of games, it’s probably not a good idea if any of these proposals are passed. The league was pleased, for example, that the average length of games decreased from 3 hours, 7½ minutes in 2013 to just under 3 hours, 6 minutes in 2014.
With that in mind, it’s probably no surprise that not a single proposal to expand replay came from the NFL’s competition committee.
These proposals and more were discussed Wednesday afternoon via conference call with competition committee chair Rich McKay, president and CEO of the Atlanta Falcons, and Rams coach Jeff Fisher, a longtime member of the committee.
“We discussed this at length basically,” Fisher said. “We don’t want to go there. The replay system was never designed to involve fouls.”
Or just about everything else proposed this year. On many Mondays, particularly after losses, Fisher has a lot to say about officiating. But on Wednesday’s conference call, he said improving officiating — not expanding replay — is the way to go.
“Dean (Blandino) is doing a great job of improving the quality of officiating,” Fisher said, referring to the league’s vice president of officiating. “We can take care of some of these issues on the field through that means, rather than put ourselves in a (situation) where we’re looking at plays where the standard is so different when you’re talking about on-the-field (call) versus the frame-by-frame review.”
The frame-by-frame, slow-motion look obviously is not something an officiating crew is capable of doing in real time during a fast-moving game.
“We ‘framed-by-framed’ a lot of things this past spring (at competition committee meetings) and it’s just not something we support,” Fisher said.
As for the five proposals made this year by the competition committee, there’s little sizzle there, except for a proposal aimed at combating the alignment subterfuge used with success by the Patriots in the playoffs. Under the proposal, if a normally eligible player reports ineligible to the referee, he must line up in the tackle box (not outside like a receiver).
Fisher said there was much input on this proposal from coaches and team officials.
“There was some concern that unless we had some guidelines, this thing may get out of hand,” Fisher said.
But there were no proposals on more hot-button issues such as expanding the playoffs to 14 teams (instead of 12), eliminating kickoffs, or the catch/no catch rule that became such a topic of conversation after the controversial “no-catch” ruling on the Dez Bryant play against Green Bay in the playoffs.
Speaking of catch/no catch, McKay said: “No club submitted a rules proposal on that. Nor was it a big topic in the surveys that were returned from the clubs. But we as a committee spent an awful lot of time on it.
“And I think in the language we can help bring more clarity in the rule, which is a difficult rule because of the fact you’re dealing with plays in the end zone, you’re dealing with plays on the sideline, you’re dealing with plays in the field of play.”
Among some of the more interesting team proposals not involving replay:
• New England has proposed that the ball be snapped from the 15-yard line for extra points, in effect making it the equivalent distance-wise of a 33-yard field goal.
• Chicago wants both teams entitled to a possession in overtime. Under the current rule, the game ends if the team receiving the kickoff to start overtime scores a touchdown on that possession.
• And in the wackiest proposal, if a team is successful on a two-point conversion after a touchdown, it will be given an opportunity for one “bonus point” by making a field-goal style kick from 50 yards away.
With six points for a TD, followed by a two-point conversion, and the “bonus point,” a nine-point deficit would be a one-possession game.
We can thank Indianapolis for that one.
• By Jim Thomas
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/foot...cle_b423f0d2-ffa0-5cfb-a223-321200c06aeb.html
It’s not just us. Judging by the nature of 18 rules proposals, many NFL teams aren’t all that pleased with the level of officiating in the league.
To wit, 13 of the 18 proposals submitted for discussion at next week’s NFL owners meetings in Phoenix deal with expanding the instant replay system in one form or another.
The most extreme approach — call it the nuclear approach — comes from our friends in New England. The Patriots have proposed making all plays reviewable other than scoring plays or turnovers. (Scoring plays and turnovers already are subjected to automatic reviews.)
Detroit wants to review all penalties called. Tennessee and Washington have submitted proposals that would have all personal fouls subject to reviews (but in different ways).
Tennessee has a proposal to make penalties called for hitting a defenseless receiver reviewable.
Indianapolis wants fouls on any defenseless player — including peel-back blocks and hits on long snappers — reviewable.
And there’s more.
Tennessee wants to add replay for the game clock at the end of the half, at the end of regulation and at the end of overtime.
Chicago wants the play clock subject to replay, to determine if the ball was snapped in time.
New England chimes in again with a proposal to put fixed cameras on all boundaries of the playing field — sidelines, goal line, back of the end zone — thus making it consistent at all venues, and have it available for all replays.
And Washington feels there just aren’t enough replay challenges. The team with the controversial nickname has proposed that each team should be allowed three coaching challenges instead of two.
For a league obsessed with the length of games, it’s probably not a good idea if any of these proposals are passed. The league was pleased, for example, that the average length of games decreased from 3 hours, 7½ minutes in 2013 to just under 3 hours, 6 minutes in 2014.
With that in mind, it’s probably no surprise that not a single proposal to expand replay came from the NFL’s competition committee.
These proposals and more were discussed Wednesday afternoon via conference call with competition committee chair Rich McKay, president and CEO of the Atlanta Falcons, and Rams coach Jeff Fisher, a longtime member of the committee.
“We discussed this at length basically,” Fisher said. “We don’t want to go there. The replay system was never designed to involve fouls.”
Or just about everything else proposed this year. On many Mondays, particularly after losses, Fisher has a lot to say about officiating. But on Wednesday’s conference call, he said improving officiating — not expanding replay — is the way to go.
“Dean (Blandino) is doing a great job of improving the quality of officiating,” Fisher said, referring to the league’s vice president of officiating. “We can take care of some of these issues on the field through that means, rather than put ourselves in a (situation) where we’re looking at plays where the standard is so different when you’re talking about on-the-field (call) versus the frame-by-frame review.”
The frame-by-frame, slow-motion look obviously is not something an officiating crew is capable of doing in real time during a fast-moving game.
“We ‘framed-by-framed’ a lot of things this past spring (at competition committee meetings) and it’s just not something we support,” Fisher said.
As for the five proposals made this year by the competition committee, there’s little sizzle there, except for a proposal aimed at combating the alignment subterfuge used with success by the Patriots in the playoffs. Under the proposal, if a normally eligible player reports ineligible to the referee, he must line up in the tackle box (not outside like a receiver).
Fisher said there was much input on this proposal from coaches and team officials.
“There was some concern that unless we had some guidelines, this thing may get out of hand,” Fisher said.
But there were no proposals on more hot-button issues such as expanding the playoffs to 14 teams (instead of 12), eliminating kickoffs, or the catch/no catch rule that became such a topic of conversation after the controversial “no-catch” ruling on the Dez Bryant play against Green Bay in the playoffs.
Speaking of catch/no catch, McKay said: “No club submitted a rules proposal on that. Nor was it a big topic in the surveys that were returned from the clubs. But we as a committee spent an awful lot of time on it.
“And I think in the language we can help bring more clarity in the rule, which is a difficult rule because of the fact you’re dealing with plays in the end zone, you’re dealing with plays on the sideline, you’re dealing with plays in the field of play.”
Among some of the more interesting team proposals not involving replay:
• New England has proposed that the ball be snapped from the 15-yard line for extra points, in effect making it the equivalent distance-wise of a 33-yard field goal.
• Chicago wants both teams entitled to a possession in overtime. Under the current rule, the game ends if the team receiving the kickoff to start overtime scores a touchdown on that possession.
• And in the wackiest proposal, if a team is successful on a two-point conversion after a touchdown, it will be given an opportunity for one “bonus point” by making a field-goal style kick from 50 yards away.
With six points for a TD, followed by a two-point conversion, and the “bonus point,” a nine-point deficit would be a one-possession game.
We can thank Indianapolis for that one.
