NFL - NEWS & NOTES

Hey! Its Thursday and there's a game tonight! I can dig it !

 

Possession is not accounted for when this play ends, though. Why in this instance should it revert to the team that didn't possess the ball last?

 

Possession IS accounted for, because a ball out of the end zone (either end zone) cannot be marked at the spot the ball went out of bounds, therefore it is a turnover. Any ball that goes out of bounds and not in the field of play is a change of possession...at the offensive end, it is a safety at the defensive end, it is a touch back. You can't simply say, we'll just put the ball at "X" yard line...it is a change of possession because the ball went out of bounds at a point that cannot be spotted.

 

OK now I'm picking up what you're putting down. Even if I still don't agree with it entirely. *DRINK*

 

Apples and oranges there the two are completely different. YEs if you fumble out of your own endzone it should be a safety but when you fumble out of your opponents endzone it should not result in loss of ball. If you want to make them take the ball on the the 5, the 10 or even the 20 and have it be whatever is the next down that would make more sense than hey you fumbled it out of the endzone so we are going to reward the defenese.

 

No one has ever had a problem with this rule. the fumble rules are just fine. How is giving the ball back to the offense fair to the defense that just caused the fumble?

 

You must live under a rock Ive heard plenty of complaining about this rule when it has happened before.


As I said before you don't give the ball to the defense when they fumble it out of bounds on the sideline so why at the endzone?

 

no one? i bet there are plenty of players and owners who don't like the rule. just bc the NFL uses it doesn't make it a good rule.

 

I can't believe people think that incompetence should be rewarded? Don't fumble the ball.

 

So EXACTLY what did the other team do to "deserve" the ball?

Did they recover it? No.

Did they prevent the other team from getting to (or very near, at least) their end zone? No.

 

It goes back to the soccer or probably more accurately the rugby days. Going out of bounds is a turnover as you should have stayed in. You can't really reset a ball from the endzone if you go out of the endzones. So stuff similar to touchbacks or safety punts were in place. Now in football those endzone rules stayed similar but the sidelines between the goallines no longer constitute a turnover.

In keeping in line with the no-turnover rules for going OOB, it would not be weird at all for the NFL to rule a fumble going forward OOB through the endzone always gets marked where the ball was lost.

 

So sideline fumbles should be turnovers, too, then, right?

 

This is my point with the last post. Because sideline fumbles/stepping OOB isn't a turnover, then why should a fumble through the endzone be one? It's an archaic rule to when the sport was something else. Also along similar lines I don't think you should be able to score off a forward fumble. If you changed the endzone fumble rule to be to place the ball where the ball was lost, then you probably should also stop awarding scores or even any gain when the ball is lost forwards.

 

Joe-did u think Ryan Mathews fumble vs Detroit was clearly recovered by Detroit? #62 looked out of bounds and no camera angle was clear about possession or out of bounds. i saw 4 big bodies around a ball but no ball in sight. it could've easily been ruled out of bounds. your thoughts?

 

I already showed a picture with Kelce touching the ball with his legs/crotch while his hands were laying OOB. That should have been a Eagles ball. However the refs on review only focused on the Lions players, none of which touched the ball while OOB.

 

I think there is an agenda to make bad calls, how can refs look at a replay and still make the wrong call? Even when clearly visible they can still call it wrong.

 

refs need to be put on notice when they make a mistake even when replay says otherwise. if not, then why even have replay of these guys continue to blow calls?

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/clint...easons-nfl-tv-ratings-are-down-204942343.html

wow - 3 more reasons why the NFL ratings are down. never thought of 2 and 3. good stuff.

 

Well, the ratings arnt down because of me. I watch all the football I can. Besides, there are now many ways to watch a game with out tuning into a Major Network.

One thing that wasnt covered in that article is the way these games are being promoted. Maybe the networks ought to take some responsibility instead of pointing fingers at everything under the sun but themselves.

 

Lions rule out Riddick, Ebron...