| FTBL If there was one rule you could change in CFB.

I'm not crazy about the new clock rules. I'd like to see the 35 second clock back. And please stop the clock on out of bounds plays all the time.
 
BamaFish13 said:
yeah, i agree that ruls is garbage..whats it matter if we dont have enough men on the line...lol

Thank you!

If you don't have enough men on the line...you're at a DISADVANTAGE most of the time. Especially if the defense calls a blitz package.

Too many men on the line makes sense, but not enough men is your business! lol

This is sort of on topic, but how about the rules they DON'T ENFORCE! If I see another QB take a snap with his mouth piece stuck in his helmet...I'm gonna scream. Going by the rules, that should be an equipment violation.

~Bryan
 
BamaFish13 said:
what would it be?

I would have to say mine would be that the players could get up and run..after they fall.if they havent been touched.

RTR :D

That's #1. I would like to see pass interference be a spot penalty. Also, go back to the old clock rules.
 
In respect to "not enough men on the line"...they never specify the penalty. That is what makes me mad.

Was it not enough men in the trenches? Or was in not enough WRs on the line of scrimmage?

It is a pointless rule in my opinion. As long as everyone is BEHIND THE FOOTBALL (lol) then what difference does it make?

~bryan
 
Something to do with helmets comming off during play maybe 5 yrd. delay of game. Exception for someone getting facemasked an pulling it off. That and the out of bounds clock stop.
 
RollTide1980 said:
In respect to "not enough men on the line"...they never specify the penalty. That is what makes me mad.

Was it not enough men in the trenches? Or was in not enough WRs on the line of scrimmage?

It is a pointless rule in my opinion. As long as everyone is BEHIND THE FOOTBALL (lol) then what difference does it make?

~bryan

The rule has a direct bearing in eligible and ineligible receivers. Hence the term, a guy was "covered up."
 
Another one:

No more of this "opportunity to catch a punt" non sense. I understand the rule in respect to injury, but no rule is gonna stop some dude from clocking another guy.

I say if you catch the ball...prepare to get cleaned.
As long as you don't hit him BEFORE THE CATCH, then it's all good. No more of this "not enough room" junk.

A new rule:

Chop blocks and spearing should be a 20 yard penalty!!! HOW 'BOUT THEM APPLES! lol

~Bryan
 
TerryP said:
RollTide1980 said:
In respect to "not enough men on the line"...they never specify the penalty. That is what makes me mad.

Was it not enough men in the trenches? Or was in not enough WRs on the line of scrimmage?

It is a pointless rule in my opinion. As long as everyone is BEHIND THE FOOTBALL (lol) then what difference does it make?

~bryan

The rule has a direct bearing in eligible and ineligible receivers. Hence the term, a guy was "covered up."

Just my point. lol

In my opinion everyone should be eligible on EVERY PLAY unless you're a lineman. This whole, "the tight end was covered" mess is NOT football.

If memory serves the first catch by Julio in the UK game was called back due to this stupid rule.

I understand what you mean Terry, but it doesn't make the rule any less stupid. lol :D

~Bryan
 
When the TE is covered up, he's technically a lineman. I suppose your thought is the defense should be reading jersey numbers to decide who is a receiver and who isn't?
 
TerryP said:
When the TE is covered up, he's technically a lineman. I suppose your thought is the defense should be reading jersey numbers to decide who is a receiver and who isn't?


:roll: :roll: :roll:

Um...no.

If the defense doesn't know how the receivers are, then I guess they forgot to come to practice that week.

The refs know who is eligible on each play. If the defense doesn't know...then so be it.

If the other team thinks Andre Smith is the TE and not Nick Walker...then oh well.

You know as well as I do, the QB will clear it with the ref if a lineman is eligible for a passing play.

~Bryan
 
RollTide1980 said:
In respect to "not enough men on the line"...they never specify the penalty. That is what makes me mad.

Was it not enough men in the trenches? Or was in not enough WRs on the line of scrimmage?

It is a pointless rule in my opinion. As long as everyone is BEHIND THE FOOTBALL (lol) then what difference does it make?

~bryan

the not enough men rule is one of the oldest in football. This rule eliminated the flying V. Before the rule offenses would start way behind the line of scrimmage and run full speed at the defense
 
RollTide1980 said:
TerryP said:
When the TE is covered up, he's technically a lineman. I suppose your thought is the defense should be reading jersey numbers to decide who is a receiver and who isn't?


:roll: :roll: :roll:

Um...no.

If the defense doesn't know how the receivers are, then I guess they forgot to come to practice that week.

The refs know who is eligible on each play
. If the defense doesn't know...then so be it.

If the other team thinks Andre Smith is the TE and not Nick Walker...then oh well.

You know as well as I do, the QB will clear it with the ref if a lineman is eligible for a passing play.

~Bryan

Based on the formation the refs know who is eligible as receivers.

You are wrong about the QB having to clear it with the ref if a lineman is eligible or isn't eligible. They do advise the ref (line judge actually) at times (it's not a bad idea, by no means) that they intend to run that play but by no means is it a situation where they "clear" it with the ref.

As long as the tackle isn't covered up and you have enough men on the line of scrimmage (7) he's eligible.

That's the rules, check it out for yourself.
 
cat.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom