Potential Rule Change

[*pally*]

What would the NFL do without Steelers-Bengals games to point out deficiencies in their rules.

Call this one the JuJu Smith-Schuster Rule: allow 2 personal fouls to be accepted on the same play

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/12/06/nfl-will-discuss-allowing-two-personal-fouls-to-be-accepted-on-one-play/

NFL will discuss allowing two personal fouls to be accepted on one play
Posted by Michael David Smith on December 6, 2017, 2:10 PM EST

Getty Images
When Steelers wide receiver JuJu Smith-Schuster delivered an illegal block to Bengals linebacker Vontaze Burfict, and then stood over Burfict and taunted him afterward, Pittsburgh was flagged for two penalties. But by rule, only one of those penalties could be enforced — a rule the league will consider changing for next year.

NFL Executive Vice President of Football Operations Troy Vincent said today that the league has discussed changing the rules so that two personal foul penalties could both be accepted, allowing for a 30-yard penalty for egregious acts.

“It has been discussed,” Vincent said. “It’ll be discussed again in February.”

The rule that only one penalty can be enforced on a team on a play makes sense, to a point: If four different offensive linemen false start, it wouldn’t make sense to call four five-yard penalties and march the offense back 20 yards. But the rule that allowed Smith-Schuster to get away with both an illegal hit and taunting — which was considered part of the “continuing action” of the play even though it happened after the play was over — creates a bad precedent where players could figure that if they’re going to get flagged for a personal foul anyway they might as well just go ahead and taunt the guy they hit.

So although 30 yards of penalties would be a harsh punishment, it would make sense: If a player commits two personal fouls on one play, he deserves a harsh punishment.

[jj22]

League always changing rules after the Bengals/Steelers game. They wait til the Bengals get beat up and concussed, then change the rules so that Bengals players can't retaliate come next game. I'm on to them!

[*PhilHos*]

(12-06-2017, 04:44 PM)pally Wrote: What would the NFL do without Steelers-Bengals games to point out deficiencies in their rules.

Call this one the JuJu Smith-Schuster Rule:  allow 2 personal fouls to be accepted on the same play

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/12/06/nfl-will-discuss-allowing-two-personal-fouls-to-be-accepted-on-one-play/

NFL will discuss allowing two personal fouls to be accepted on one play
Posted by Michael David Smith on December 6, 2017, 2:10 PM EST

Getty Images
When Steelers wide receiver JuJu Smith-Schuster delivered an illegal block to Bengals linebacker Vontaze Burfict, and then stood over Burfict and taunted him afterward, Pittsburgh was flagged for two penalties. But by rule, only one of those penalties could be enforced — a rule the league will consider changing for next year.

NFL Executive Vice President of Football Operations Troy Vincent said today that the league has discussed changing the rules so that two personal foul penalties could both be accepted, allowing for a 30-yard penalty for egregious acts.

“It has been discussed,” Vincent said. “It’ll be discussed again in February.”

The rule that only one penalty can be enforced on a team on a play makes sense, to a point: If four different offensive linemen false start, it wouldn’t make sense to call four five-yard penalties and march the offense back 20 yards. But the rule that allowed Smith-Schuster to get away with both an illegal hit and taunting — which was considered part of the “continuing action” of the play even though it happened after the play was over — creates a bad precedent where players could figure that if they’re going to get flagged for a personal foul anyway they might as well just go ahead and taunt the guy they hit.

So although 30 yards of penalties would be a harsh punishment, it would make sense: If a player commits two personal fouls on one play, he deserves a harsh punishment.

Don't just make it 2. Make it as many as are committed on one play (personal fouls, that is).

While we're at it, don't make penalties off-setting unless they are for the same yardage. Penalize both teams and move the ball accordingly.

[*pally*]

(12-06-2017, 05:33 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Don't just make it 2. Make it as many as are committed on one play (personal fouls, that is).

While we're at it, don't make penalties off-setting unless they are for the same yardage. Penalize both teams and move the ball accordingly.

yeah...I always thought it was stupid to let some procedural penalty wipe away a personal foul

[sandwedge]

(12-06-2017, 05:33 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Don't just make it 2. Make it as many as are committed on one play (personal fouls, that is).

While we're at it, don't make penalties off-setting unless they are for the same yardage. Penalize both teams and move the ball accordingly.

That has always irked me. One team gets a flag for moving and the other team gets flagged for holding and it just wipes out the play...

[SunsetBengal]

(12-06-2017, 07:21 PM)sandwedge Wrote: That has always irked me. One team gets a flag for moving and the other team gets flagged for holding and it just wipes out the play...

To my understanding, procedure fouls are dead ball fouls, before the snap.  They are to be enforced as if the ensuing play never occurred.  The only foul a defense can actually accrue is a personal foul, because if a hold or PI happened, it didn't really happen, as the play was void.  But yes, in the event of a procedural foul and a defensive personal foul, both should be assessed, rather than offsetting and replay the down.

[*bengalfan74*]

I've never liked the holding call on DB's being an automatic first down. I mean come on it's 3rd and 27 and they get a get out of jail free card ?

[Atomic Orange]

(12-06-2017, 08:01 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I've never liked the holding call on DB's being an automatic first down. I mean come on it's 3rd and 27 and they get a get out of jail free card ?

When you have Dre Kraptastick on your team, yes.


I'd throw at him all day long.

[Housh]

And now we can’t get them back lol


Ughhhhh

Why everything happen AFTER we get beat up?

[yellowxdiscipline]

2 personal fouls and he's ejected right? Makes sense, if you commit a personal foul for a football play, then taunt it should count as two separate flags.

[Interceptor]

(12-09-2017, 11:50 AM)Housh Wrote: And now we can’t get them back lol


Ughhhhh

Why everything happen AFTER we get beat up?

Because everyone knows the passive nature of our coach and that seeps into our team environment. I really wish we had someone like Parcells. He didn't take shit and is not afraid to sit superstar drama queens. Sure, he had his team(s) play a lot of soft zones, but made sure his players hit hard - so hard that it would make a receiver think twice about making a catch.

[CanadianBengal]

(12-06-2017, 08:01 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: DI've never liked the holding call on DB's being an automatic first down. I mean come on it's 3rd and 27 and they get a get out of jail free card ?

I agre make it ten yards only and play over.

[*bengalfan74*]

(12-10-2017, 07:19 PM)CanadianBengal Wrote: I agre make it ten yards only and play over.

Exactly  :andy:

[TKUHL]

Pitt has literally ruined football for me. Look at the rule changes due too Pitt over the past 15 years, most while playing against us. The hatred I have towards Pitt is insane, but more rules once again as a result of a dirty coached Pitt team does nothing. The NFL is driving itself into the ground.

[swilson3828]

(12-06-2017, 04:59 PM)jj22 Wrote: League always changing rules after the Bengals/Steelers game. They wait til the Bengals get beat up and concussed, then change the rules so that Bengals players can't retaliate come next game. I'm on to them!

Lol...the Squealers haven't fared too well either.  Let's see....Bell twice, and Brown once....and now Shazier...even though that was his own fault.  I think we've even injured Roth before