Proposed Rule Changes

[Big Fella]

Change the seeding for playoffs so if a wild-card team has a better record than a division winner, it receives a higher seed. In that case, Jacksonville (11-5) would not have played at the Steelers (AFC North champions at 10-6). "We don't see any reason to fool with that," said Rooney, who believes division champs deserve the reward of a higher seed.

I'm inclined to disagree with Mr. Rooney here. Jacksonville had a better record, in a better division. I'm kind of ambivalent because I do think winning your division requires some kind of reward, but compelling arguments can be made either way. A rule change here would not offend me, but I could go either way.

• A 5- to 7-day moratorium before free agency begins to allow team officials to talk to the agents for potential free agents without signing them. It's a process that goes on now anyway, illegally, and the NFL hopes to make it equal for everyone who now follows the rules. "No question there's an issue with people jumping the gun now," Rooney said.

This already happens so this will level the playing field. I'm all for it.

• Eliminate the 5-yard penalty for minor facemask violations with only those involving serious infractions drawing a 15-yard penalty.

Again, I'm ambivalent. Currently, when a facemask is grabbed a flag is thrown. The official then decides the proper punishment, usually based on how violently the neck is jerked. Eliminating the five yard rule allows for a more uniform punishment, but then could create a difficult is it/is it not gray area for the officials. This could work well, but lends itself to judgment calls late in games.

• Eliminate the rule that allows the receiver to have a catch if, in the judgment of the official, he was forced out of bounds by a defender to prevent him from getting both feet in bounds. That play now would be ruled an incompletion unless the receiver was carried out of bounds.

Again, this could create a possible gray area. I actually like the rule in college because there is no question marks. Because you only need one foot down, there is no force out rule. I would need a clearer definition of "carried out." I think the rule works fairly well as is.

• Prohibit long hair from obscuring a player's name on the back of his jersey, ala Troy Polamalu. The player would not be required to cut his hair, but wear it under his helmet. "I think we probably are inclined to not be for the change," Rooney said. "I would say there probably needs to be some consideration of what's too much. Hair out of the helmet is one thing, hair halfway down your back, I don't know."

Other than Hollywood Bags, does anyone really give a fuck?

• Expand instant replay for reviews on field goals, except on those where the ball rises above the uprights because of camera angles.

Sure

• Allow the winner of the opening coin flip to defer its choice to the second half, mimicking the college rule.

I like it. More strategy IMO is always good for the game.

[Super Dave]

Seeding a wild Card team who played a piss schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

[Big Fella]

Seeding a wild Card team who played a piss schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Jacksonville accumulated 11 wins. The combined wins of their opponents equaled 132 and 7 playoff teams.

Pittsburgh accumulated 10 wins. The combined wins of their opponents equaled 116 wins and 3 playoff teams.

[Steelerfan81]

I don't see the need for the NFL to fuck with simple things like facemask, or catching the ball and being pushed out. Leave well enough alone.

[Steeltime]

This love fest with the first round seedings is simply stupid.

As other posters have pointed out, what if the third best wildcard record has a better record than a division champ? Should the 10-6 team that does not make the wildcard round stay home, while the 9-7 div champ makes the playoffs?

What about the fact that a horesehit NFC team could make the playoffs with a crap record, while much better AFC teams are kept out of the playoffs?

Or how about the fact that one team has a pussy joke of a schedule in a weak ass conference, and coasts to a first round bye because of the flaccid competition? Why not consider strength of schedule?

This shit could never end. If a team wants to host a playoff game, then win the division. If the team cannot win the division, then learn to win on the road.

Two out of the past 3 Super Bowl champions somehow found a way to win on the road.

[TDX27]

Keep the wildcard the way it is. If you don't win your division, you don't get a higher seed, better record or not.

You still need to have the push out rule also. Although, the refs usually miss the push out 75% of the time.

[CaptainJack]

If they go to seeding by record rather than division champs, what's the point of having divisions at all? Shouldn't they just seed all teams by record and do away with divisions? Then we might have to factor strength of schedule.
Why not include a coach's poll to the mix and the NFL playoffs can be as silly as the BCS rankings?


Keep it the way it is.

[Steelz]

If anything, i always felt that the holding penalty should be changed. They say it can be called almost every play so if it happens so frequently & the refs can call it anytime they want, why not change it to only 5 yards instead.

[MattArndt]

I think the "push-out" rule is crap. It should have never existed. There are boundaries on the field. You should be required to play within the boundaries. If you can't get your feet in on a catch because of defensive contact, either you should've run a better route (not so close to the boundary), or your QB should've placed the ball better so you didn't have to leap. A defense should not be penalized for one of its members being in position and making a good defensive play like using the sideline as a boundary - which it is.

Why not eliminate the need for a kicked ball to go through the uprights if it is touched by the defense? Although extreme, it's the same logic. If the official's judgement tells him the ball would've gone through without the contact by the defender, he can just award the offense a FG (like they award TDs on "push-outs" in the end zone.)

[BermudaSteel]

"If it ain't broke...don't fix it..."

That is all.

[Super Dave]

Jacksonville accumulated 11 wins. The combined wins of their opponents equaled 132 and 7 playoff teams.

Pittsburgh accumulated 10 wins. The combined wins of their opponents equaled 116 wins and 3 playoff teams.

So what?

Seeding a wild Card team who played a piss schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Seeding a wild Card team who played a harder schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Seeding a wild Card team over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

As it relates to the NFL

You cite one example. In league history.

Should we account for injuries too?..The 11-5 Steelers of 2005 were obviously better than higher seeds.

What about the record of the opponents, opponents? How far should we take this?

Why should the Steelers be penalized because the NFC west sucks balls?
That's the division that the the NFL scheduled the Steelers to play last year.
We would of been fucked out of a home game for the playoffs right from the get go.

Let's strip away tradition, lets take away any significance or reward of a Division Championship, lets just have 2 conferences and invite all teams above 8-8, wait a minute, we didn't take into account SOS, lets invite all teams, like the NCAA Tournament, a Super Bowl Tournament. That should get us better ratings. Do away with Conferences, have only Divisions so the Bungles can buy a AFC North Division Championship hat every 30 years.

[Hines57]

Leave Troy's hair alone.

[Sluzilla]

I think the "push-out" rule is crap. It should have never existed. There are boundaries on the field. You should be required to play within the boundaries. If you can't get your feet in on a catch because of defensive contact, either you should've run a better route (not so close to the boundary), or your QB should've placed the ball better so you didn't have to leap. A defense should not be penalized for one of its members being in position and making a good defensive play like using the sideline as a boundary - which it is.

completely agree...

[FistfullofRings]

Seeding a wild Card team who played a piss schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

This is two different issues. A wild-card team could just as well have had a tougher schedule.

[FistfullofRings]

I think the "push-out" rule is crap. It should have never existed. There are boundaries on the field. You should be required to play within the boundaries. If you can't get your feet in on a catch because of defensive contact, either you should've run a better route (not so close to the boundary), or your QB should've placed the ball better so you didn't have to leap. A defense should not be penalized for one of its members being in position and making a good defensive play like using the sideline as a boundary - which it is.

The push rule also forces the defender to question whether or not he should make a play on the reciever and creates to much room for interpretaion by the officials.

[FistfullofRings]

I'd be against dpoing away with the 5 yard facemask if it was ever actually called. Seems like the only year they used it was the first year it existed. I've seen a lot that should have been 5 yarders get called 15 yarders. I fear if they do away with the 5 yarder, we'll just get more ticky-tacky 15 yard facemask penalties.

[Super Dave]

This is two different issues. A wild-card team could just as well have had a tougher schedule.

Seeding a wild Card team who played a piss schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Seeding a wild Card team who played a harder schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Seeding a wild Card team over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

As it relates to the NFL

[Spike]

I think the NFL should be like the NHL with 82 game seasons.

[FistfullofRings]

Seeding a wild Card team who played a piss schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Seeding a wild Card team who played a harder schedule over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

Seeding a wild Card team over a division champ is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard

As it relates to the NFL

Why? Only 6 of a teams 16 games are divisional games. Hypothetically, a 5-11 Division Champ could host an 11-5 WIld Card team. Division titles are pretty dumb as they relate to the NFL.

[steelberger1]

If division titles mean nothing, then division rivalries mean nothing.

Why do that to the sport that works just fine the way it is?

If they are going to do this, then why not punish division winners who play in a shitty division (cough-Pats-cough). If we got to play the Jet-Dolphins-Bills for 6 games, we wouldnt have had a worse record than Jax.

[FistfullofRings]

If division titles mean nothing, then division rivalries mean nothing.

Why do that to the sport that works just fine the way it is?

If they are going to do this, then why not punish division winners who play in a ty division (cough-Pats-cough). If we got to play the Jet-Dolphins-Bills for 6 games, we wouldnt have had a worse record than Jax.

It worked a lot better when they had 6 dvisions, when they went to 8 divisions they increased the liklihood of inequities and unfairness. This proposed rule change is just one way of trying to fix a problem they should have identified before they went to the current format.

The Jags don't play in the AFC East so I don't see your point.

[SteelerFan448]

The playoff changes would be a dumb change. The hair rule is a waste of time. The others I would be fine either way.

[Vader]

I think the "push-out" rule is crap. It should have never existed. There are boundaries on the field. You should be required to play within the boundaries. If you can't get your feet in on a catch because of defensive contact, either you should've run a better route (not so close to the boundary), or your QB should've placed the ball better so you didn't have to leap. A defense should not be penalized for one of its members being in position and making a good defensive play like using the sideline as a boundary - which it is.

Why not eliminate the need for a kicked ball to go through the uprights if it is touched by the defense? Although extreme, it's the same logic. If the official's judgement tells him the ball would've gone through without the contact by the defender, he can just award the offense a FG (like they award TDs on "push-outs" in the end zone.)

Exactly. We should have a "pick up" rule not a "push out" rule. If a player is picked up and placed out of bounds then give the WR the catch. If he is just pushed out after he caught the ball then tough.

[Stryker]

Much like every year when we get rule changes, they seldom occur.

No chance of the Playoff rule or forcing a receiver out of bounds (though it's a good idea) happening.

If I had to bet on any, it would be the Review on FGs. The Tampering rule would help the cheaters lose an edge. The only other possibility is the hair rule being viewed as a uniform violation and possible safety issue. Do I want to see a short haired Polamalu? no. But the NFL likes conformity and uniformity, so no odd colored sneakers, no Livestrong bands, and no Terrible Towels.

Too bad we didn't enact real rule changes like:
Eliminate the tuck rule. Think about it, it hasn't been done yet, but anytime a qb is being sacked, legally, he can fake a throwing motion bring the ball down and intentionally bounce the ball off his own belly strait into the ground. It's a bad rule.

Eliminate the inactive game day roster. By allowing all rostered players (not counting the practice squad) to play, it allows for better quality of special teams play and for better depth in case of injury on game day.

Finally, my favorite, is eliminate all restrictions on the 3rd QB. Currently you lose the ability to play a higher QB if you put in the 3rd QB. Any other player at any other position can be freely substituted, so why not the QB? Allowing all QBs the ability to play can increase the opportunity for a trick play (with multiple QB allignments) or by using the 3rd QB as a place holder on kicks. Also this frees up teams to give well needed experience to players who like Brian St Pierre, haven't sniffed the game day field for most of his career.

[steelberger1]

It worked a lot better when they had 6 dvisions, when they went to 8 divisions they increased the liklihood of inequities and unfairness. This proposed rule change is just one way of trying to fix a problem they should have identified before they went to the current format.

The Jags don't play in the AFC East so I don't see your point.

The point is that this proposed rule gives an extra benefit to teams that play in shitty divisions. If there is only one good team in a division (ie New England) then they basically have a 6 game head start on everyone else when fighting for those home playoff games.

Changing the playoff format is a stupid idea.

[FAB802]

We had the benefit of playing in a pretty weak division for quite a few years too. Who gives a shit? The balance of power in the NFL changes so much with the parity in the league it isn't like you can slant the rules to offset it. They should leave the playoffs alone and figure out why they take three times as long to review plays as it takes the college officials to do it. They've only been at it ten years longer and still don't know how to speed it up.

[steelberger1]

We had the benefit of playing in a pretty weak division for quite a few years too.

I realize that, but was it ever so bad that teams in the division (other than the division winner) were a collective 12-36? That is a .250 winning percentage. That has got to be right up there with the most pathetic divisions of all time.

New England could have won that division at 7-9.

My point is that this rule change would actually (more often than not) punish teams who play in a tough division (since they have to play tough teams twice) and reward teams who play in an easy one (since they get to play shitty teams twice).

[FistfullofRings]

The point is that this proposed rule gives an extra benefit to teams that play in ty divisions.

No, it most certainly does not.

Why would you assume that a team with a record good enough to make the playoffs as a wild card and better than other division champion records played in an easy division??? If anything they would have at least a team good enough to be a 3 seed in their division.

Think it through.

[FistfullofRings]

My point is that this rule change would actually (more often than not) punish teams who play in a tough division (since they have to play tough teams twice) and reward teams who play in an easy one (since they get to play ty teams twice).

OK so under the current format the 11-5 wild card Steelers playing in a tough conference have to travel to New England to play the 7-9 division champion Patriots. Wheras this rule would require the Patriots to travel to Pittsburgh instead. Your point about schedule difficulty as it relates to this rule change makes no sense.

[Sphinx9780]

I hate the illegal contact after 5 yards, stupid rule, let the boys play, there so many rules any more just seems like there are lot games that would be fun to watch are just dull

[stevew]

Expand the playoffs to 8 teams, and just seed them based on record. No bye weeks. It would add 4 extra playoff games per year, and increase quite a bit of revenue. Plus there's a good chance that more week 16 and 17 games would be competitive, due to teams fighting for seeds and playoff spots.

However, make the 2nd tiebreaker for seeds(after head to head) division winner.

AFC Playoffs last year
NE vs HOU
IND vs CLE
JAC vs TN
SD vs Pitt

[FistfullofRings]

Expand the playoffs to 8 teams, and just seed them based on record.

Keep it at 6 teams, seed them based on record and tell the 9-7 division champion congrats on winning your division, but you're not good enough for the playoffs.

[SteelerFan448]

Keep it at 6 teams, seed them based on record and tell the 9-7 division champion congrats on winning your division, but you're not good enough for the playoffs.

If that's the case, you mine as well have no divisions.

[Super Dave]

It worked a lot better when they had 6 dvisions, when they went to 8 divisions they increased the liklihood of inequities and unfairness. This proposed rule change is just one way of trying to fix a problem they should have identified before they went to the current format.

The Jags don't play in the AFC East so I don't see your point.

1) There is no "problem" that needs fixing

2) Fuck Jacksonville, seriously, FUCK Jacksonville.

[THE GREAT BURGHBOY]

• Allow the winner of the opening coin flip to defer its choice to the second half, mimicking the college rule.


Don't like that one at all. Keep the toss the way it is in the NFL. I hate coaches that defer. By the time you get that 2nd half kickoff, you may be down 21-0. Take the ball, ram it diown their throats, score a TD, and never look back. I salivate when we're playing NCAA '08 and a coach defers after winning the coin toss. They're just telling me "I wan't to be down 7-0".

[Hollywood Bags]

We had the benefit of playing in a pretty weak division for quite a few years too. Who gives a ? The balance of power in the NFL changes so much with the parity in the league it isn't like you can slant the rules to offset it. They should leave the playoffs alone and figure out why they take three times as long to review plays as it takes the college officials to do it. They've only been at it ten years longer and still don't know how to speed it up.

I agree with every point, PLUS quit having the ref go over and look at the rep[lay, do it like in college, have a ref in the pressbox review the plays.

[SteelerFan448]

They're just telling me "I wan't to be down 7-0".

I look at it the other way. I think you're saying our defense is going to shut you down, we'll get a lead AND get the ball to start the second half. I love when the Steelers lose the coin toss so they can start on D.

[THE GREAT BURGHBOY]

I look at it the other way. I think you're saying our defense is going to shut you down, we'll get a lead AND get the ball to start the second half. I love when the Steelers lose the coin toss so they can start on D.

That scares me the most about kicking off first. Sure our D is good, but over the last few years our opponents have started at the 35 or better. Our kickoff coverage scares me, and it's gonna need to be fixed this year.

[toledosteel7]

look at the cluster-fuck that would have occurred if we had the seeding change back in the AFC in 2002.

http://www.nfl.com/standings?category=div&season=2002-REG&split=Overall

five 9-7 teams.
all the tie-breaking procedures would have to be looked at and possibly changed. Leave it alone, it is what it is. If Jacksonvilled doesn't like it, they need to figure out how to beat Indy.

[Jmat]

Keep the wildcard the way it is. If you don't win your division, you don't get a higher seed, better record or not.



That's the way I look at it.

[FistfullofRings]

If that's the case, you mine as well have no divisions.

DING DING DING!!!

As far as the playoffs are concerned I think no divisions makes more sense than 8 4-team divisions. Ideally, it would be great to get rid of 2 teams and have 6 5-team divisions again.

[FistfullofRings]

1) There is no "problem" that needs fixing.

OK, forget seeding for a minute. So if the 11-5 Steelers missed the playoffs altogether, while a 9-7 division champ hosted a wild-card game, you'd still contend there was "no problem"?

[BillvinCowbert]

OK, forget seeding for a minute. So if the 11-5 Steelers missed the playoffs altogether, while a 9-7 division champ hosted a wild-card game, you'd still contend there was "no problem"?

So I take it you also have a huge problem when an AFC team misses the playoffs and has a better record than an NFC team that makes it?

So, then let's get rid of conferences as well, because that's not fair either.

I'd have no problem if an 11-5 team had to miss the playoffs because they lost out to two other wildcard teams with better records. It's part of the scheduling. Teams in the NFC East right now will have a tougher road than someone in the NFC West. If 9-7 wins that division (going 3-3 in division) and there's an 10-6 Arizona team that swept 4 against STL and SF, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that the 10-6 team is more deserving.

[FistfullofRings]

So I take it you also have a huge problem when an AFC team misses the playoffs and has a better record than an NFC team that makes it?

So, then let's get rid of conferences as well, because that's not fair either.

I'd have no problem if an 11-5 team had to miss the playoffs because they lost out to two other wildcard teams with better records. It's part of the scheduling. Teams in the NFC East right now will have a tougher road than someone in the NFC West. If 9-7 wins that division (going 3-3 in division) and there's an 10-6 Arizona team that swept 4 against STL and SF, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that the 10-6 team is more deserving.

My problem is that the teams are too spread out across the NFL. I don't see the importance of division champions when there are only 4 teams in a division, and 10 of the 16 games are played outside of the division.

[markymarc]

I like all of the proposed rule changes except for the playoff seeding one. Sorry, but if you want a higher seeding then win your division. I don't care who is in your division or how many games were won. Win the division and then you can have a home playoff game. I hope this one doesn't get passed because it's not right IMO.

[Super Dave]

My problem is that the teams are too spread out across the NFL. I don't see the importance of division champions when there are only 4 teams in a division, and 10 of the 16 games are played outside of the division.

The importance of the Division Championship is the Playoff berth.

37% of a teams games are within the division.

[FistfullofRings]

The importance of the Division Championship is the Playoff berth.

37% of a teams games are within the division.

Right, ONLY 37% and the division championship is decided by best overall record, division record only factors in as a possible tie-breaker. A team could go winless in their own division and still be the division champion. IMO, NFL divisions are just stupid.

[Hiwa Kaoru]

Okay. . . either restructure to two conferences, each with three divisions of five teams.
Or change the playoff format to 8 teams per conference, 4 division winners seeded 1-4 and the four top records seeded 5-8

I prefer the first, it keeps the division rivalries that teams thrive off of (sorta kinda) :confused:
Anyway, the second would be better for revenue.

Hm. . . it'd be interesting if they chose the former of the two how the divisions would be organised. . . Can anyone see us in a new AFC East with the Pats?


So, what do you guys think? :D

[FistfullofRings]

Okay. . . either restructure to two conferences, each with three divisions of five teams.
Or change the playoff format to 8 teams per conference, 4 division winners seeded 1-4 and the four top records seeded 5-8

So, what do you guys think? :D

I think you first have to get rid of 2 teams for the first option.

I'd be against expanding the number of playoff teams,