What did I miss?

[Merlin]

Seems pretty tic-tacky and just something else the referees have to manage now. Because they don’t have enough to fuck up.

It’s like they think they need to make changes since they are meeting.

I don’t like it.

This is for the refs. When the league puts so much on them to protect QBs it gets impossible with teams using disguised handoffs as read-option threats. And it's not good for defenders to be put on the spot where they want to be able to treat a QB like a runner to avoid being embarrassed but they have also watch themselves if the QB pulls it in and is a passer.

It just cleans shit up. I like the change. QBs are being paid way too much to be risked as runners and if you're gonna do that then it's clear when they're runners.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

The person who mentioned this rule was specifically referring to Lamar Jackson and that it will hinder him.

 

[blackbart]

This is for the refs. When the league puts so much on them to protect QBs it gets impossible with teams using disguised handoffs as read-option threats. And it's not good for defenders to be put on the spot where they want to be able to treat a QB like a runner to avoid being embarrassed but they have also watch themselves if the QB pulls it in and is a passer.

It just cleans shit up. I like the change. QBs are being paid way too much to be risked as runners and if you're gonna do that then it's clear when they're runners.

If the team decides they want to run RPO they understand the risks they take with their QB.

I don’t think having the exchange in one physical perspectives over another puts them more at risk.

The refs can’t handle the responsibilities they have now, they miss calls meant to protect the QB head nearly every game in one way or the other.

 

[Merlin]

If the team decides they want to run RPO they understand the risks they take with their QB.

I don’t think having the exchange in one physical perspectives over another puts them more at risk.

The refs can’t handle the responsibilities they have now, they miss calls meant to protect the QB head nearly every game in one way or the other.

Look how much teams are investing in the QB position. It's insane. Rules are hard to apply yes. But this approach should simplify things for the refs because teams will need to run their QB or not run their QB. If he's running it's game on. If he's in the pocket and not running, he's protected.

 

[RamBall]

The way to stop the read option is to hit the QB every time whether he keeps it or not. If the coach wants his QB to last the season they will stop calling the read option. Then the QB has to prove he is more than a gimmick QB.

 

[XXXIVwin]

I'm not sure we're all on the same page about what the ACTUAL rule change for 2023 is. I've been looking up stuff about "illegal forward handoff" and I'm sure not finding much.

Here's an excerpt I found:

1. Illegal handoffs are now more illegal. I can’t actually recall this happening, but it’s illegal to hand the ball forward to another player unless it’s behind the line of scrimmage AND the player is considered eligible. If it’s to an ineligible player or it’s beyond the line of scrimmage a forward hand off is illegal. The rule makes the language more consistent to similar rules and makes the enforcement from the spot of the foul in all circumstances. If you’re wondering, the penalty is five yards and a loss of down.

Anyway, if the above is accurate, this won't have much effect on the RPO, right? Sounds like a very minor tweak... for example, making it clear that a QB can't hand the ball to an offensive lineman to avoid a last-second sack.

If this were a significant change that greatly affected the style of play of RPO's and run-heavy QB's, it would be getting a lot of press. But it's not.

If someone can find a link to the ACTUAL WORDING of the new rule changes, that would help clarify things. But to me it doesn't sound like there's any new rule that makes it illegal for a "forward handoff to a RB behind the line of scrimmage".

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not seeing this new rule out there.

2023 NFL Rule Changes include suggestions by Buffalo Bills

At least one is going to make some people angry

www.buffalorumblings.com

 

[XXXIVwin]

Okay, I found the exact language of the new rule. Again, sounds very minor and will hardly ever be enforced. From my understanding, this rule doesn't have anything to do with a handoff between a QB and a RB, since a RB is an eligible receiver. Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

It's proposal number 12 on page 9:

https://nflcommunications.com/Documents/Approved%202023%20Playing%20Rules,%20Bylaws%20and%20Resolutions.pdf

 

[TSFH Fan]

Okay, I found the exact language of the new rule. Again, sounds very minor and will hardly ever be enforced. From my understanding, this rule doesn't have anything to do with a handoff between a QB and a RB, since a RB is an eligible receiver. Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

It's proposal number 12 on page 9:

https://nflcommunications.com/Documents/Approved%202023%20Playing%20Rules,%20Bylaws%20and%20Resolutions.pdf

I thought CBS Sports was semi-reliable.
Maybe, I just might have to downgrade them to semi-semi-reliable.

 

[XXXIVwin]

I thought CBS Sports was semi-reliable.
Maybe, I just might have to downgrade them to semi-semi-reliable.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing! Kinda surprised me that CBS Sports may have gotten this one wrong.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Okay, I found the exact language of the new rule. Again, sounds very minor and will hardly ever be enforced. From my understanding, this rule doesn't have anything to do with a handoff between a QB and a RB, since a RB is an eligible receiver. Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

It's proposal number 12 on page 9:

https://nflcommunications.com/Documents/Approved%202023%20Playing%20Rules,%20Bylaws%20and%20Resolutions.pdf

Yeah, it sounds minor. I don’t know how clear the explanation is though. Does this mean that if a QB tried a forward handoff or toss to a receiver on a jet sweep, and the ball was dropped, that it is now a fumble and not an incompletion? Wasn’t that always the case?

Then the only instance that I see a forward handoff to an ineligible player would be to an Olinemen in a busted play. Wasn’t that already illegal?

 

[Merlin]

I'm not sure we're all on the same page about what the ACTUAL rule change for 2023 is.

Translation: I'm about to spoil all your creative fun with facts.

 

[XXXIVwin]

Yeah, it sounds minor. I don’t know how clear the explanation is though. Does this mean that if a QB tried a forward handoff or toss to a receiver on a jet sweep, and the ball was dropped, that it is now a fumble and not an incompletion? Wasn’t that always the case?

Then the only instance that I see a forward handoff to an ineligible player would be to an Olinemen in a busted play. Wasn’t that already illegal?

Yeah I'm with ya on it being extremely minor change, Elm. And my brain hurts trying to figure out the extremely rare circumstances where and how this "tweak" would even be applicable.

It'll definitely be rare, like the time when dipshit Brady "sorta" got away with 2 forward passes vs the Rams:

Tom Brady gets away with bizarre double pass thanks to Rams declining penalty | Sporting News

www.sportingnews.com

Mainly I was just interested in spoiling @Merlin's creative fun

 

[FrantikRam]

Reading through this discussion I had to laugh...two years ago this time, someone on a fan forum was looking through obscure rule changes and found something about a double punt and said "when would that EVER happen???"

 

[XXXIVwin]

Reading through this discussion I had to laugh...two years ago this time, someone on a fan forum was looking through obscure rule changes and found something about a double punt and said "when would that EVER happen???"

Yeah that was crazy!


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4UjFAR9FABU