Rule changes that passed

Honestly I think the way it is in Madden messed me up too on this.

Most of the time in Madden I choose to kickoff so I can have the ball first in the 2nd half. I guess I just thought that was the way it is in the NFL too.

I do too, which is why I thought maybe that was where the confusion stemmed from (being that it is such a cultural icon). I actually didn't know you couldn't defer in the NFL until I saw this thread and saw that they were instituting the rule. I had actually always wondered why I had never seen a team win the toss and do anything but choose to receive, even though that happens all the time in high school and college. Now that makes perfect sense.

Isn't there always an incentive to drill someone if the opportunity is there?

The rule was too subjective, I like that they are taking it away.

You are right about it being too subjective, but you have now penalized the offense (yeah I know, "who cares, everything favors the offense).

I see very little complaints with the NCAA rule of no force out but only one foot in. This would give the receiver a better chance dealing with the DB's as the mechanics of getting one down is far easier than two.

Point is, take something, give something.

i think deferring the toss means you can choose the wind to be on your side in the 4th instead of kicking or recieving first

I do too, which is why I thought maybe that was where the confusion stemmed from (being that it is such a cultural icon). I actually didn't know you couldn't defer in the NFL until I saw this thread and saw that they were instituting the rule. I had actually always wondered why I had never seen a team win the toss and do anything but choose to receive, even though that happens all the time in high school and college. Now that makes perfect sense.

Interesting, and I was wrong. Well I was kinda joking about the whole "vag" thing because I did not know what deferring met.

Didn’t hear this until today. They are looking at the stiff arm to the facemask as a legal maneuver. Without details, it may be premature to speculate but if they get rid of it, good riddance.

I’m as old school as anyone, but why have ball carriers been immune from what everyone else isn’t. With apologies to Walter Payton fans, this has to go.

I have been very critical of the rash of rule changes, but I must admit, I approve of this.

Didn’t hear this until today. They are looking at the stiff arm to the facemask as a legal maneuver. Without details, it may be premature to speculate but if they get rid of it, good riddance.

I’m as old school as anyone, but why have ball carriers been immune from what everyone else isn’t. With apologies to Walter Payton fans, this has to go.

I have been very critical of the rash of rule changes, but I must admit, I approve of this.

Yeah, if defense got communication thing then why not make them completely even and make offensive facemask a penalty.

The force out rule is kind of iffy in my opinion. So are they saying the receiver has to clearly be coming down in bounce? Are they basically saying there is no more force out rule established? If so, DB's certainly have an edge now. I guess it's ok though. I mean most of the rule changes have been for the WR's. About time they paid attention to the defense.This is a good rule change. Too many times we have seen critical forceout calls made that were strictly a judgement call. The biggest problem is that it was not open to review. Now any sideline reception will be open to review, and two feet will have to come down inbounds.

Having Landry playing deep safety might be an advantage on deep sideline throws where he uses his range to force the receiver out. Lord, what might have been with Landry AND Taylor playing a 2-deep zone.

hmm, or if you playing a team like the Bears, you might want to kick to them twice because their offense may give better field position rather than going against their D. Interesting.

Who in the hell would want to kick to Hester twice?

Couple things, the changing the force out rule without giving some “compensation” to the receiver (how about one foot in bounds, a la NCAA) will hurt receivers. What about if a DB was able to carry a receiver coming down out of bounds? The wording implies that that would be ok and that would be stupid.

On the facemask penalty, where was the outcry for this? Does this mean that ALL grabbing the mask is 15 yards or only the more egregious? This will be far more difficult for officials since there is an all or nothing element to something that if they weren’t quite sure there would be at least some penalty.

They just can’t keep from screwing around with things that aren’t broken, IMO.

Carry outs are against the rules, other articles I've read on it have mentioned this.

The receivers have been given enough compensation on everything else that the db's SHOULD get something.

Basically if you are to much of a vag and you can't make a decision you let the other team.

You're deferring your choice to the 2nd half, not giving up your decision altogether.