The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

The Competition Committee met last week and, as usual, a number of rule changes have been discussed. I haven't seen a comprehensive list of all the items discussed, but collecting from various sources I've found the following:

- Onside kick alternative (4th and 15 from own 25th, 4th year in a row this is being considered)
- "QB Push" (as popularized by the Eagles)
- Hip drop tackle, the worry being increased injury risk.
- Make roughing the passer reviewable.
- 3rd quarterback (dress a 47th player on game day as an emergency quarterback)
- Allowing jerseys with the number "0"

Any decisions will be made at the owners' meeting held March 26 through 29. Changes have to be approved by a 2/3rds majority.

I think we will see some sort of rule change on the 3rd quarterback for the simple reason that it is something that "affects the product", but doesn't really come with a cost or risk - and is unlikely to really change much competitively. It could be limited to the postseason, but I do think we will see something here.

The onside kickoff alternative has a decent chance of passing, but there are reportedly some hardline opponents of the change and if I had to bet, I'd say it gets tabled without a vote again. The biggest issue is that recovery rates are all over the place and comparisons from season to season is almost impossible with the NFL changing rules regarding where players can line up so often. The big change was before the 2018 season, which dropped the success rate from a relatively stable 20-some percent to less than 8%. It improved slightly in 2019 to nearly 13%, before crating to 4.5% in 2020. That was followed by a massive bounce to just over 16% in 2021, but last year saw only 3 successful recoveries out of 56 (5.4%). There is no question that recovery rates are way down compared to pre-2018 where the no-running-start rule was implemented, but the bounce from the rule change prior to 2021 didn't stick for whatever reason (it limited the number of players the receiving team could have 10-25 yards from the kickoff spot to 9). There are alternatives to 4th and 15, like reducing the number of players in the 10-25 yard range further.

This is certainly an issue the league wants to "fix", but with only 50-some attempts a year and ever-changing rules, it's hard to identify the issues. One complicating factor is that pre-2018, surprise onside kicks had a > 40% recovery rate (2000-2017). There used to be about 10 of those a year. The recovery rate on surprise kicks since the 2018 rule change has fallen to around 10%, but attempts are way down as well and with only a few years of data, it's hard to be sure what the "real" probability of recovery is. A "4th and 15" rule obviously wouldn't do anything to boost surprise onside recovery probabilities, but I don't even know if the league thinks that part of the issue is relevant.

I don't think we'll see a change in the QB push rules. It's only been a "problem" (if you even think it's a problem) for a season and the obvious course of action would be to wait and see how teams deal with it now that they know about and can prepare for it. If we do see a kneejerk reaction, I think it will be limited in some way (like no pushing players within 2 yards of the line of scrimmage). It's kind of interesting that until 2005 there was actually a rule prohibiting the pushing the ball-carrier forward, but it was almost never used even when it was clearly happening.

With regards to the hip-drop tackle, the Competition Committee asked for more evidence on how often this type of tackle actually happened and the associated injuries. Those numbers will presumably be available in time for the owners' meeting, but I don't see them putting it to a vote this year.

Roughing the passer is a more interesting issue. I don't think we'll see it as *reviewable* in the normal sense that a coach can challenge it, simply because it flies in the face of the league's policy of not having "judgment calls" being reviewable. The failed attempt at allowing pass interference to be reviewed only strengthens this argument. The question in my mind is whether the league believes it can do something about the obvious BS calls in some other way, like changing the rule enforcement (not the rules), the refereeing guidelines, or some sort of "sky judge" review.

I have absolutely no opinion on the use of the number "0" on jerseys and no idea what kind of resistance such a proposal would meet. I also don't know why it was disallowed, only that it was allowed at least as recently as the 70s (both 0 and 00). The NCAA opened up the use in 2020, so I'm guessing that is indirectly the impetus for a change now.

While not gameday relevant, there has been considerable talk of expanding the (mandatory) use of Guardian Caps (the soft outer caps on regular helmets). They aren't insanely popular with players (heat and comfort), but an improved model should be ready by the time camps start. Head injuries have been down massively among the players who have used these and some coaches have kept specific players in them all season. Last season, use of Guardian Caps was mandatory for linemen, linebackers, and tight ends from the start of training camp to the second preseason game.

Roughing the Passer should absolutely be reviewable but I doubt the league would allow it as they use the threat of it now to protect their stars and increase scoring.

Having a 3rd emergency QB seems like a good thing too, I see no harm in it.

Could making RTP reviewable have the opposite effect intended, like it did with Pass Interference?

I still think it would super cool to allow each team one field goal mulligan per year

That's up the the refs if they want to be incompetent and/or corrupt. If Joe Six Pack can make the right call at home, then they can make the right call with years of training and 12 different angles on replay.

Here's an interesting video I saw yesterday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_JPxlEwiYk

The XFL's process for replay review is much more transparent than the NFL's.  The viewers can listen in to the actual conversation happening between the booth and the officials on the field.  It also seems to be much faster than review in the NFL.

^ I saw that somewhere a couple of weeks ago and I thought it was really cool.  I'd love for the NFL to adopt that.

Anything to improve transparency and speed up the game is better.  Having the booth guys pontificating about what the call will be for several minutes is antiquated.

I just personally feel that the NFL Refs drag it out and still somehow get the call wrong out of ego and anger. They get embarrassed that they got the call wrong so they'll pretend like it was really close and wait awhile or they just don't like the whole system of being questioned and refuse to admit their mistakes. I can't think of any other reasonable explanation for getting calls on replay wrong that are obvious to everyone.

^ I think that we unfairly rip NFL refs, because we don't know their rationale.

If they're in the booth and we see him say, "it looks like his toe might be down, but I just don't have a definitive angle, so I'm gonna have to stick with the original call" and you see the thought process of them trying to find a way to overturn the call, but they don't have the data, I think it would go down easier.

It's the RULE on roughing the passer that needs to be changed.  

Ultimately, this is football.  In football you get tackled.  If you don't want to be tackled, be a kicker, like I was LOL.

Quarterbacks should be allowed to be tackled just like any other people.

Ditch "low hits"

Ditch the body weight rule

Does the body slam rule apply to other players?  If not, get rid of that too.

Late hits should be illegal

Helmet to helmet should be illegal.

 

I can understand that, but when the call is so obvious that the announcers go "What were the refs thinking?" then I can't give them the benefit of the doubt. The benefit being "They are just dumb and blind".

There should be more transparency like the XFL, so it's suspicious when there isn't as there is no need to hide such things.

^ Yeah, and you wouldn't be wondering what they were thinking if you could hear their thought process.  Also, the people in the booth don't know everything.  They might not fully understand the rules or weren't present in rules meetings or whatever.  They are TV personalities.

I've been a ref before and it's hard to see things in the moment, you get blocked from views, etc.  Even when you're right there....things get in the way, life moves fast.  Also, people's body language can throw you off.  These guys do pretty well, considering.  They just get shit on all the time.

I hate all the constant rule changes in the NFL.

That being said I think there ought to be more penalties on offensive players for helmet to helmet hits on tackles.  Seems like every game a defensive player goes low to tackle an offensive player with the ball, so as not to hit him high, then the offensive player goes low to avoid the tackle and they hit head to head.  Yet the defensive player gets the penalty called on him.  Why, he was in position first.  Some of these penalties should be called on the offense.

It looks like a total of 17 Rule changes have been approved - here's a link to the list:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-rule-changes-2023-jersey-no-0-is-back-personal-foul-penalties-clarified-one-date-for-roster-cutdowns/

Someone is going to have to explain the following rule change to me:

---------------
    To change the definition of a launch, proposed by the Competition Committee

Rule change: A launch, which is a personal foul (15-yard penalty), is now if a player leaves one or both feet to make a tackle.
---------------

I must be missing something, because this would seem to outlaw any tackle where the contact is not initiated while both feet are touching the ground - i.e. any tackle where the defender isn't pretty much stationary. *Running* to make a tackle would be launching. You would have to slow to a walk in order to make sure both feet are planted before initiating contact.

Outlawing forward handoffs also just seems silly. It will create a gray area where it's unclear if the quarterback let go of the ball before the "receiver" touches the ball. What problem is the competition committee even attempting to solve?

Not a fan of a single, massive roster cut-down day. The Turk is going to be insanely busy and it just seems overall messy.

So the no forward handoffs makes the wildcat plays a penalty unless the "handoff" is a toss forward. then it's a pass

It seems that it would pretty much kill the RPO to me.  Aren't many of those handoffs "forward"?

But if you're behind the line of scrimmage it shouldn't matter, should it?

^Yeah, but if they're counting it as a pass, then that RB can't pass the ball.  I guess I'm using the wrong terminology.  It's like...part of the option or something.

It's where the RB or WR has the option to throw after getting the ball handed to them in in motion from the edge or that weird shotgun handoff thing.

I don't think that is forward. The QB turns his body for that. Think of a receiver in motion with a QB in shotgun. The motion man runs in front of the QB and takes a handful. I think that is the play in question.

I guess you can RPO there as well though.

That would just be a jet sweep from the gun wouldn't it? It's still behind the LOS. I don't understand the purpose of this rule.

I don't think you have read the rule change. LoS has nothing to do with it. The rule will be that the QB cannot hand the ball off in front of him, ever. The handoff has to be to the side or behind (taking into account if he turns around that is considered behind).

Is "in front/behind" determined by the direction of the LoS, or the direction the QB happens to be facing?

I'm just wondering what problem it's addressing?

Direction of the LoS.

Ditto.  What problem is it solving?

The biggest complaint I heard was about PHI's QB sneaks, and this doesn't appear to apply.

I don't have a problem with Hurts scrum type QB sneaks either.

Some new rules approved Monday/Tuesday:

- Thursday games can now be flexed, with a bunch of caveats, and the league pinky-swears to use it as little as possible.

- Emergency quarterback can now be dressed without counting towards the 48-player gameday limit. The QB has to be on the 53-man roster and can only come in if the two non-emergency quarterbacks are out (injury, disqualification). If either is cleared to play again, the emergency quarterback has to leave the field. There are *a lot* of questions about this one that come down to the wording. The goal is obvious (allow a 3rd quarterback in extreme circumstances without allowing abuse), but without the precise wording, it's hard to tell exactly how it will work.

- Kickoff returns have pretty much been abolished with a new rule that brings all fair-caught balls behind the 25-yard line up to said 25-yard line.

Horrible rule and I don't know why the owners allowed it. This can impact playoff races if they flex a team dealing with injuries who could've been healthy by Sunday.

It has to be done at least 28 days in advance, so it's not like there would be any "gaming" of the system either way. This way, it's more like that part of the schedule just isn't set in stone until a month in advance. Since not all teams play the same number of TNF games anyway, I don't think it makes an overall competitive difference.

I see several problems with the Thursday flex.

Fans.  It is bad enough to have a buy a ticket to a game you planned to attend at 1:00 and be heading home by 8 pm be switched to night game in which you get home at 3 am.   But the risk that a game I bought a ticket for a Sunday game getting move to Thursday means I will NEVER buy a ticket to a game.  Even worse for fans who fly to games. 

Time fairness.  When the NFL schedules Thursday games they typically schedule it so that the visiting team had a home game the week before having a road game and the visiting team having a home game.  Each team has a short week and exactly one flight - in once got get home in the other to get to the game.  For example if say week 2 (yeah, I know they won't be flexing that early) Dolphins at NE - Dolphin's would fly twice and NE would fly zero. 

it's to prevent the situation where we had the crap broncos on national TV about 6 times last year

The solution to this would be to stop having terrible Thursday Night games that cause injuries. This isn't baseball, guys can't play on 3 days rest without suffering a physical toll.

Supposedly statistics do not back that up and that's why the owners and union agreed to it.

(https://www.thesportsbank.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/homer-simpson-statistics.jpg)

Tackling the qb. They want it to happen less. I’m just finding out about this rule. Somehow I completely missed it. Taking the read option out seems like it will affect a lot of QBs negatively and we are already hurting for good qb play.