(10-03-2016 11:03 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]Not sure anyone saw this...
http://www.cbssports.com/college-footbal...gal-plays/
I do wonder if we're going to see the lineman downfield rule adjusted more like the NFL. It does make sense.
Lol. Jimbo, Samford qb
He needs to start coaching his own team. Butthurt over Chizik slapping him around.
The whole SEC lulz @ jimbo and prays he goes to LSU.
Not a huge fan of running QB's, myself. Granted, a QB that can't find an open receive and scrambles away from a sack, especially when he gets a first down, is as bread and butter in football as you get.
So yeah, I'd definitely like to see the NFL rule adopted.
Gary Patterson from TCU:
Gary Patterson echoed Jimbo Fisher's concerns about offensive linemen blocking downfield on run-pass options. He thinks the rules have to be revisited and that offensive linemen shouldn't be allowed to block past the line of scrimmage. "It's making it really hard for defenses," Patterson said. "I really don't know how you defend it and play zone."
Think the tide is starting to turn on this.
(10-04-2016 04:08 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]Gary Patterson from TCU:
Gary Patterson echoed Jimbo Fisher's concerns about offensive linemen blocking downfield on run-pass options. He thinks the rules have to be revisited and that offensive linemen shouldn't be allowed to block past the line of scrimmage. "It's making it really hard for defenses," Patterson said. "I really don't know how you defend it and play zone."
Think the tide is starting to turn on this.
I hope so. Pretty much every rule change of the past 30 years has helped the offense
Compare today's game to 1980:
1) O-linemen can hold inside the shoulder pads
2) It's a penalty to touch the WR beyond 5 yards
3) Offsides rules were changed to favor the offense
4) The center can roll or tilt the ball around all he wants before the snap, making it harder for defensive linemen to key in on the ball's movement to start the play (this one is minor but it still favors the offense)
5) A block in the side is no longer considered clipping - the defender has to be completely backwards to you in order to be a penalty
6) Illegal chop blocks used to include any block below the belt in the open field, but now it is only illegal if the defender is being tag-teamed (a high-low black) (although I think the NFL went back on this rule change this year)
7) It's a penalty to breathe on the quarterback
8) Defenses can't lead with the helmet, but Running backs can. And if the defense touches the running back on the head, it's a penalty (which is bizarre because it's less safe now - the running back is actually encouraged to lead with his helmet more than ever before).
Is Jimbo's correct that rules were changed to allow O-lineman to go 3 yards downfield on a pass? Add that to the list if it's true.
How can anyone possibly argue with Fisher here? He's absolutely right and everyone knows it.
Pretty sure I heard during the coverage of a game this year that ineligible receivers downfield are a point of emphasis this year. I know that coaches in all three divisions and both DI subdivisions were polled back in January and the majority want the existing rule enforced but do not want more stringent rules.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files...020516.pdf
Quote:Ineligible Receiver Downfield
Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the
passer releases a forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79).
Do you believe this rule should remain the same but be stringently
enforced?
FBS Yes 74% No 23% No opinion 3%
Quote:Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the passer releases a forward pass
that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79). Do you favor a rules change that would make this one yard rather than three yards?
FBS Yes 32% No 67% No opinion 1%
Quote:Blocking downfield on passes Should additional rules be added to manage this trend in offenses?
FBS Yes 27% No 67% No opinion 6%
I highly doubt you are going to see any additional rules, only a greater emphasis on enforcing the rules already in place.
(10-04-2016 11:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure I heard during the coverage of a game this year that ineligible receivers downfield are a point of emphasis this year. I know that coaches in all three divisions and both DI subdivisions were polled back in January and the majority want the existing rule enforced but do not want more stringent rules.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files...020516.pdf
Quote:Ineligible Receiver Downfield
Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the
passer releases a forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79).
Do you believe this rule should remain the same but be stringently
enforced?
FBS Yes 74% No 23% No opinion 3%
Quote:Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the passer releases a forward pass
that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79). Do you favor a rules change that would make this one yard rather than three yards?
FBS Yes 32% No 67% No opinion 1%
Quote:Blocking downfield on passes Should additional rules be added to manage this trend in offenses?
FBS Yes 27% No 67% No opinion 6%
I highly doubt you are going to see any additional rules, only a greater emphasis on enforcing the rules already in place.
Makes sense. Cal has been penalized for an ineligible receiver downfield twice this season so far. I don't remember it being called last year.
(10-04-2016 11:15 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2016 11:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure I heard during the coverage of a game this year that ineligible receivers downfield are a point of emphasis this year. I know that coaches in all three divisions and both DI subdivisions were polled back in January and the majority want the existing rule enforced but do not want more stringent rules.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files...020516.pdf
Quote:Ineligible Receiver Downfield
Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the
passer releases a forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79).
Do you believe this rule should remain the same but be stringently
enforced?
FBS Yes 74% No 23% No opinion 3%
Quote:Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the passer releases a forward pass
that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79). Do you favor a rules change that would make this one yard rather than three yards?
FBS Yes 32% No 67% No opinion 1%
Quote:Blocking downfield on passes Should additional rules be added to manage this trend in offenses?
FBS Yes 27% No 67% No opinion 6%
I highly doubt you are going to see any additional rules, only a greater emphasis on enforcing the rules already in place.
Makes sense. Cal has been penalized for an ineligible receiver downfield twice this season so far. I don't remember it being called last year.
If one was the Hawaii game that may have been where I heard it.
(10-04-2016 11:22 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2016 11:15 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2016 11:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure I heard during the coverage of a game this year that ineligible receivers downfield are a point of emphasis this year. I know that coaches in all three divisions and both DI subdivisions were polled back in January and the majority want the existing rule enforced but do not want more stringent rules.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files...020516.pdf
Quote:Ineligible Receiver Downfield
Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the
passer releases a forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79).
Do you believe this rule should remain the same but be stringently
enforced?
FBS Yes 74% No 23% No opinion 3%
Quote:Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the passer releases a forward pass
that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79). Do you favor a rules change that would make this one yard rather than three yards?
FBS Yes 32% No 67% No opinion 1%
Quote:Blocking downfield on passes Should additional rules be added to manage this trend in offenses?
FBS Yes 27% No 67% No opinion 6%
I highly doubt you are going to see any additional rules, only a greater emphasis on enforcing the rules already in place.
Makes sense. Cal has been penalized for an ineligible receiver downfield twice this season so far. I don't remember it being called last year.
If one was the Hawaii game that may have been where I heard it.
Yes, Hawaii and last Saturday vs. Utah.
the question is going to be will it continue to be called. And will a game get decided by it not getting called.
And I do think if guys like Fisher and Patterson are talking about it- they're trying to drum up support. Also 30 of the coaches didn't respond to the survey. So It may not be as overwhelming as it looks.
separate note- but did you see on the survey the coaches response on not stopping the clock on a 1st down?
yes- 18%
No- 79%
even doing it all but last 2 minutes of half/game
yes- 30%
no- 63%
(10-04-2016 11:24 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2016 11:22 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2016 11:15 PM)Wedge Wrote: [ -> ] (10-04-2016 11:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty sure I heard during the coverage of a game this year that ineligible receivers downfield are a point of emphasis this year. I know that coaches in all three divisions and both DI subdivisions were polled back in January and the majority want the existing rule enforced but do not want more stringent rules.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files...020516.pdf
Quote:Ineligible Receiver Downfield
Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the
passer releases a forward pass that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79).
Do you believe this rule should remain the same but be stringently
enforced?
FBS Yes 74% No 23% No opinion 3%
Quote:Under current rules, it is illegal for an ineligible receiver to be more than three yards beyond the neutral zone before the passer releases a forward pass
that crosses the neutral zone. (Rule 7-3-10, FR-79). Do you favor a rules change that would make this one yard rather than three yards?
FBS Yes 32% No 67% No opinion 1%
Quote:Blocking downfield on passes Should additional rules be added to manage this trend in offenses?
FBS Yes 27% No 67% No opinion 6%
I highly doubt you are going to see any additional rules, only a greater emphasis on enforcing the rules already in place.
Makes sense. Cal has been penalized for an ineligible receiver downfield twice this season so far. I don't remember it being called last year.
If one was the Hawaii game that may have been where I heard it.
Yes, Hawaii and last Saturday vs. Utah.
Then it probably was.
I have a friend who officiates DII games, if I get a chance I'll ask him if they have been told to look for them. It may be next week before I get to talk to him though because he's likely headed to the coast tomorrow to help with the evacuations.