What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
154 Comments
- dezweber, on 09/05/2008, -0/+68The forceout change is going to prove very interesting play, to say the least.
- ScottyF311, on 09/05/2008, -3/+54How about a rule where your famous girlfriend isn't allowed to sit in the stands and jinx the team?
- bustabinary, on 09/05/2008, -1/+38"Second half coin toss: Clubs will now have the option to defer the opportunity to kick or receive the kickoff to the second half."
I don't get it. - PullingTeeth, on 09/05/2008, -0/+36There is no foul for incidental contact: "The foul for incidental grasp and release of the facemask has been eliminated. Twisting, turning or pulling the facemask will remain a 15-yard personal foul."
If the player releases the facemask, no penalty. If the player moves it around, 15 yards. I think its fair. - lewjeff, on 09/05/2008, -5/+33More rules that the Patriots can break.
- Systolic1, on 09/05/2008, -3/+28I don't understand the concept of the deferred coin toss option... Who would get the ball at the beginning of the game?
- DaviDTC, on 09/05/2008, -0/+21What if you literally catch a guy who jumped for the ball in the middle of the field and you carry him out of bounds? Sounds like that will be an incomplete pass.
- bbtrinet, on 09/05/2008, -0/+21In 2007, an NFL team that won the coin toss had 2 options:
a) kick
b) receive
The OPPONENT would then have the choice in the 2nd half.
Therefore, if you chose to KICK for the opening kickoff, then in the 2nd half, your opponent gets the choice and would choose to RECEIVE, therefore the opponent would get the ball first in BOTH HALVES. So, obviously, 99% of teams choose to 'RECEIVE' - a no-brainer.
Now in 2008, the options are:
a) kick
b) receive
c) defer to 2nd half
Therefore, if you want to kick the ball off, choose c) defer, and your OPPONENTS now choose the first half, and you choose the second half. Of course, after defering, it's not a guarantee you would kick, but in 99% of the cases the opponent would choose to receive.
Why can't the rules just allow a team which wins the toss the option of what half they want to receive? I don't know.... this is the NFL.
Additionally, another odd rule - after every touchdown/fieldgoal in the NFL, the DEFENSE chooses who kicks off. Of course, in 100% of the cases, the defense chooses that the scoring team kicks off... but I saw ONE instance where this wasn't the case. A team was leading 56-0, near the end of the 4th quarter. The losing team scored.... making it 56-7. The coach was upset at his defense for letting the other team score and wipe out the shutout, that he chose to kick off, and keep his defense on the field as punishment. :) - inactive, on 09/05/2008, -0/+20Highly unlikely.
- irfanmp, on 09/05/2008, -6/+26Maybe with these rule changes now in play, the Dolphins can win more than one game.
- GoingPostal, on 09/05/2008, -0/+20How about a rule where once you retire, you can't un-retire?
- vtbarrera, on 02/03/2009, -0/+19Actually, that is the way it is now. DBs will now be playing the man more and not the ball on those sideline catch situations.
- bbtrinet, on 09/05/2008, -1/+15In 2007, an NFL team that won the coin toss had 2 options:
a) kick
b) receive
The OPPONENT would then have the choice in the 2nd half.
Therefore, if you chose to KICK for the opening kickoff, then in the 2nd half, your opponent gets the choice and would choose to RECEIVE, therefore the opponent would get the ball first in BOTH HALVES. So, obviously, 99% of teams choose to 'RECEIVE' - a no-brainer.
Now in 2008, the options are:
a) kick
b) receive
c) defer to 2nd half
Therefore, if you want to kick the ball off, choose c) defer, and your OPPONENTS now choose the first half, and you choose the second half. Of course, after defering, it's not a guarantee you would kick, but in 99% of the cases the opponent would choose to receive.
Why can't the rules just allow a team which wins the toss the option of what half they want to receive? I don't know.... this is the NFL.
Additionally, another odd rule - after every touchdown/fieldgoal in the NFL, the DEFENSE chooses who kicks off. Of course, in 100% of the cases, the defense chooses that the scoring team kicks off... but I saw ONE instance where this wasn't the case. A team was leading 56-0, near the end of the 4th quarter. The losing team scored.... making it 56-7. The coach was upset at his defense for letting the other team score and wipe out the shutout, that he chose to kick off, and keep his defense on the field as punishment. :) - ks136, on 09/05/2008, -2/+15I don't think they should have changed the facemask rule. Just my two cents...
- inactive, on 09/05/2008, -0/+11well they play the Raiders once and the Bills twice so..maybe?
- readacook, on 09/05/2008, -0/+11My name's not Rugby. Also, shut up.
- darkened, on 09/05/2008, -0/+10"If they have control of the ball it's pass interference" ?? How much more of an idiotic statement can you make on football calls, when they have even partial control of the ball the defender is going to smack the ***** out of them to tackle them or attempt to strip the ball.
Pass interference can only happen before the receiver has contact with the ball otherwise it would be... catch interference which is also know as DEFENSE. - DaviDTC, on 09/05/2008, -0/+10I think what it means is that if you win the coin toss you can decide if you want to wait until the second half to kick/receive. The other team then gets to decide if they want to kick/receive the first half. When the second half comes, the team that won gets to decide kick/receive. It is no longer the opposite of the first half.
It sounds like the patriots and cowboys will always defer if they win the toss. Bill Belichick said he talked to lots of college coaches (this is a college football rule) and he said most teams who win the toss defer to the second half.
What is the advantage? No clue. Why would you want to give your opponent the ball first in both halfs? - inactive, on 09/05/2008, -0/+10http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=200808 ...
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Winner of the coin toss has three options
1) Kick or receive (they never choose kick)
2) Side of the field to defend, or
3) Defer the option to the second half.
Unless deferred, the loser of the toss gets to exercise the unused option 1 or 2.
If deferred, the they have two options to start the second half:
1) Kick or receiver (they always choose receive)
2) Side of the field to defend.
The other team then exercises the unused option.
Why do I say "never" and "always?"
Situation 1 - Team A wins the toss and elects to kick. Team B gets their choice in the second half and elects to receive. Now Team B has received in both halves. No coach wants to give the other team an extra series.
Situation 2 - Team A wins the toss and elects to defer. Team B chooses to receive. In the second half, unless Team A chooses receive, then Team B will receive. Again, no coach wants to give the other team an extra series.
So the normal situation is the team that receives the ball in the first half will kick off in the second. - scientyphik, on 09/05/2008, -2/+12that's what she said.
- warispeace21, on 09/05/2008, -1/+11That would be awesome to see a defender grab a receiver in the middle of the field and carry him all the way to the sidelines and throw him out of bounds. I wonder if that's legal now?
- whahaa, on 09/05/2008, -1/+11i've heard this argument, but i say let's just wait and see how many times that actually happens. i bet it's a lot tougher to catch a wide receiver mid-air and redirect his momentum without letting his feet touch the ground than it looks.
- fadetoone, on 09/05/2008, -0/+9Dude! I don't know. They mentioned it in the game last night and my friend and I looked it up. We took it to mean that you could choose to kick or receive. That made us both say, "but couldn't you already do that? You could always do it in video games."
The way it is listed on the NFL page clearly states it as a "third" option... so what the hell is it? - mattmcegg, on 09/05/2008, -1/+10I like the force-out change. Offense usually gets the advantage in pass interference and now defense can be rewarded for trying to make someone land out of bounds. It's not like football is a no-contact game.
- pintomp3, on 09/05/2008, -0/+9it's going to shrink the field and reduce scoring. many touchdowns will now be incompletes.
- BinaryDelt, on 09/05/2008, -0/+8Though the force out rule creates a HUGE advantage for the defense, I have to agree with it given how open to interpretation the old rule was. Too many hypotheticals involved.
- inactive, on 09/05/2008, -1/+8The change in the forceout rule seems like an open window to abuse.
Go Seahawks! /sigh - Netmindstorm, on 09/05/2008, -2/+9>>I don't get it.
So you are deferring to understand it - obliviousfool, on 09/05/2008, -0/+7Actually, you won't be allowed to grab a player and carry him out of bounds. That would be a reception. You can push him out, but you can't throw him out. At least that's what they're saying on the NFL Network.
- inactive, on 09/05/2008, -1/+7If you can catch a 250 pound NFL player in mid-air, carry him 15 feet without him kicking your ass or touching his feet to the ground and then toss him out, then yes, you deserve full credit for such a feat. But it's probably physically impossible... unless perhaps with a kicker.
- bearcat8543, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6owned.
- jaxter2010, on 06/17/2009, -0/+6I'm down for anything that increases contact.
- dinki, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6So if you defer then the other team would definitely say they want to receive the first half kick off. If they choose to kick then the other team will elect to receive AGAIN in the second half.
Would anyone choose to kick off and risk the chance of having to kick again in the second half? It's possible, but highly unlikely. - leerayIG88, on 09/05/2008, -4/+10#8. Banana's are allowed to cause spin outs.
- FeloniusMonkey, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6DaviDTC, you are THE devil's advocate.
- lotar732, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6Thank you for the clear explanation, this NFL fan is much obliged.
- nbcaffeine, on 09/05/2008, -0/+6Yeah, I read an analysis (linked from digg) a few weeks ago, stating that this would affect approx 1 pass per team per season. Not that big of a deal, and is a much more clear cut way to handle the situation.
- cougar3429, on 09/05/2008, -2/+7Um, no there is no holding against the ball carrier. That's how you tackle, you wrap them up (or knock them over). Do you even watch football?
- lynx44, on 09/05/2008, -0/+5I didn't either, here's a good answer:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=200808 ...
Basically, if you win, you can let your opponent choose whether to kick or receive in the first half. Then in the second half, you get to choose to kick or receive. For example, if you want to receive in both the first and second half, you would hope that your opponent would choose to kick in the first half.
EDIT: Sorry for the repost, somebody beat me to it between reading the article and comments - krets, on 09/05/2008, -0/+5If you win the coin toss you can elect to hold off on deciding whether to receive or kick until the beginning of the 2nd half. Right now you can only elect or kick or receive.
- inactive, on 09/05/2008, -0/+5weren't the guys on PTI saying that the cowboys are favored to make it to (and possibly win) the super bowl this year
- billbugger, on 09/05/2008, -0/+5@bbtrinet: Thanks! I didn't know there was a choice in the 2nd half as well. I also didn't know about the choice after a touchdown/field goal either! Interesting!!
- billbugger, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4And if your lucky, you may get a goal. boring!
- barkingPumpkin, on 09/05/2008, -3/+7Actually, incidental facemasks no longer result in penalty at all. The only penalties will come from non-incidental contact and they will all be 15 yards.
- ryan899, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4I think its going to force QBs to throw to the middle of the field more, and we might see more interceptions.
- twp219, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4I would love to see a rugby player take down Brandon Jacobs or catch Adrian Peterson.
Brandon Jacobs from last night:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7_1djI2TxU - nosecohn, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4If I were a defensive coach, I'd be adjusting my strategy already. It's so easy to take advantage of this rule change because quarterbacks are already forced to throw the sideline pass high. The DB is almost always between the QB and receiver on a sideline route, so if the pass is low, he's in a position to intercept. With the rule change, defensive coaches have got to be thinking, "OK, if the receiver's feet leave the ground when he goes for the ball, push him out." Sure, there's pass interference to worry about, but I still think this rule change will be exploited.
- samimnot, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4-Will be interesting to see how the Force Out rules works:
I see sideline passes almost eliminated, because once the receiver goes in the air to catch the ball all the defender has to do is push him enough for one foot to land out of bounds.
-Half time coin toss:
Have no idea what this improves.
-I like everything else, though…especially the face mask rule change. Runners stiff arming a defenders face mask, always seemed unfair to me. - RJLaframboise, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4The new rule that surprised me the most was the muffed snap. In the CFL, a muffed snap is considered live. I always just assumed it was the same in the NFL.
- CannedMango, on 09/05/2008, -0/+4I was wondering the same thing. There must be some specifics about the rule that make this change obvious that I don't know about.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 160 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is