SalSports.com

Examining the 2008 NFL Rules Changes

By Sal Capaccio
www.SalSports.com

As we inch closer to NFL Kickoff Weekend 2008, fans are not only getting ready to cheer on their favorite team, but are also no doubt getting ready to tell....check that.....yell viciously......at the referee in their game about what a horrible job he's doing and how his 10-yard holding call has certainly cost them a shot at their Super Bowl dreams.......AGAIN!

Well, before you actually start yelling to Ed Hochuli that his biceps are bigger than his brain, be sure you're up-to-date on your own knowledge of the NFL Rule Book.  Some of it has changed headed in to 2008.  What's different?  Here's a quick look, with my commentary on each change, of course:

Here's what it means:  Before this change, by rule, if the quarterback was under center and had a snap go through his legs and the ball was picked up behind the quarterback by another player, the play was dead and it was a false start penalty on the offense. The ball had to touch the QB.

Now, that situation will result in a fumble, whether it touches the QB or not.

In shotgun (which includes punts, field goals, and extra points), it is not considered a "direct snap," so that was and still is live no matter what.

It reminds me of playing pickup football when we would do this intentionally -- put the QB under center and have him spread his legs real far and have the center snap it to a RB standing behind him. Worked in sandlot football, but was illegal in the NFL (false start.....QB must touch it).

By the way, I think they changed the rule because it actually happened to the Bears last year against the Eagles. The ball went through Brian Griese's legs and was picked up by Philly.  However,  it was called a false start on the Bears and they kept possession and that drive actually changed the outcome of the game.

It's about time this league actually started allowing the defense the same opportunity to use the same technology they've allowed offenses to use over the last several years. 

This is a good rule as far as "fairness," but the fact is the NFL had already gone overboard when they allowed QBs to have radios in their helmets.  This is football for crying out loud!  Teams have been able to play this game and shuttle plays in and out to their quarterbacks for 116 years.  I understand coaches are paranoid about other teams stealing their signals (see: SpyGate).  So what?  What's wrong with giving the next play to a wide receiver to relay to the quarterback in the huddle?  Most high school teams on America can handle that, yet the NFL can't? 

I would rather see NOBODY from either side of the ball have one of these helmet radios than see both sides of the ball use it.  But the league has given the defense a big "10-4" on the new technology, and says it can only be used by one player on the field.  That's easy for the offense, because the QB never changes unless there is an injury.  But for the defense, considering all the personnel packages they have to react to and substitutes they have to make, that's going to be a challenge for most teams.  And what about special teams plays?  There are players from both sides of the ball and all different positions who play on the punt coverage, kickoff, and kick return teams.  Will the rule be bent in order to allow more than one radio on the field during those plays?

I'll make this call right now: this rule will be amended in some way before the 2009 season because there will be a lot of minor issues the league hadn't thought of when they passed it.

Good.  Again, it's about time a rule was amended in order to help the defense.  The offense has had every conceivable rule change in their favor order to create more scoring over the years. 

The rule currently says a receiver can't be carried or pushed out of bounds by an opponent.  All they are doing here is eliminating the word "pushed."  That means it is still a catch if a defender grabs a receiver in mid-air and "carries" him out of bounds, or if a defender hits (not pushes) a receiver down by the legs as he's in the air, and they both fall out of bounds together, but the receiver doesn't get two feet in first.

If a defender, however, literally pushes a receiver as he's in the air, and the receiver does not come down with two feet in bounds - even though he clearly would have otherwise - it is no longer a catch as it had been previously. 

I've always maintained the NFL could help eliminate this problem and create more offense and more exciting plays at the same time.  How?  Simply adopt the college rule of "one-foot in counts as a catch."  Think of it this way.  The NFL is a league of entertainment.  It is a league that thrives on the highlight machine. Can you imagine the unbelievable acrobatic and athletic catches we'd see every weekend if receivers only had to have one foot in bounds to make a catch?  It would be sick.

This rule change will have a major impact at some point in a critical game late this season or in the playoffs.  Bank on it!

Obviously this rule was brought on by the Cleveland non-field goal/field goal last year against Baltimore.  Of course field goals should be reviewable, just like touchdowns and fumbles are.  And let's face it.  I'll be shocked if there are more than  a couple that even need to be reviewed during the course of any one season.  By the time it happens again, we'll all forget the rule was even amended.

Oh. My. Goodness.  The NFL finally had the sense to listen to me about something. 

Of course, I'm sure they didn't really take their cue from me, but I have been all over this for years.  College football and high school football have always allowed the team winning the coin toss to defer their choice to the 2nd half.  It seems trivial to some, and others probably never even thought of it, but this is actually a pretty significant rule change and I can't believe it's taken the league this long to fix it. 

Maybe it doesn't matter every week, or even in most seasons for most teams, but it does matter for a lot of teams in a lot of seasons, and in certain games.

Here's why.  If you had a terrific, hard-hitting defense, but an average offense, and you were playing a big game at home, you'd probably want your defense on the field first. I know I would. The crowd on that first series, coupled with the energy of that great defense, could easily turn that possession into a game-changer with a huge turnover or even a score. By putting the offense out, knowing they probably will punt at some point, you're losing all that momentum you could have otherwise had and more importantly, probably field position, too.

Also, maybe the most important possession in a game is the first possession after halftime. Allowing your team to have that possession after making adjustments in the locker room, and before the opponent can counter-adjust would be critical.

Whether it's the coin toss or something else, I agree that part doesn't matter.....but there needs to be a way for one team or another to have that choice (I'd be all for simply giving the home team the option) to defer if they feel it's important enough for their team's chances.

So, this rule FINALLY gets it right.

  • 5-yard facemask penalty eliminated

Pull the facemask? 15-yard penalty.  Grab the facemask? 15-yard penalty.  Touch the facemask with your hand and not grab it, tug it, pull it, or yank it?  Used to be a mild 5-yard penalty.  But now it won't even warrant a yellow hankie.  Let the game play on.

If this rule was going to have a direct negative-impact on player safety I'd be against it.  But it won't.  Players know to try and avoid the facemask.  But they are so big and strong and going so fast and grabbing each other at such high intensity speeds, sometimes those incidental grabs happen.  And they shouldn't cost a team any yards or first downs.

I'm cool with this one, too.

Related Links:
NFL Digest of Rules
NFL Official Signals
 

www.SalSports.com