Rule changes you would like to see in sports...

[Davi323]

This is pretty simple, in addition to watching wrestling, many of us also have a strong interest in sports, whether it's football, soccer, basketball, baseball or hockey. As sports fans, we also love to gripe about stupid unnecessary rules in those sports. Bitch about them here, regardless of sport.

I will start out by complaining about some of the stupidity regarding the NFL.

1. Endzone celebrations. The fact that these are limited so much is a major source of annoyance for me. The NFL needs more Icky Shuffles, more Electric Slides, more fat guys doing fat guy dances. It's a GAME, let them have fun!

2. Completing the process. Yeah. As a Lions fan, I am still pissed off at that rule. Let me get this straight...if Calvin Johnson had caught the ball at the 1 yard line, and that exact same motion would have happened, so that he set the ball down in the endzone, but crossed the plane, it would have been a Touchdown. But because he was ALREADY IN THE ENDZONE, and caught it, it was actually an incomplete pass. BULLSHIT. If all you have to do is cross the plane with the ball for it to be a TD, you should only have to catch the ball, none of that bullshit football moves after the catch nonsense.

3. More consistency with elbows and knees. Currently, you need to have both feet inbounds for it to be ruled a valid catch. However, you only need one knee down in order for you to be considered tackled. This needs to change. If you want to keep one body part means you are down, then the out of bounds rule should be consistent to that. IE, the college rule, where one foot in with possession of the ball is considered in. If one knee is good enough for you to be down, it should also be good enough for you to be inbounds.

4. This one is far more radical. Reseed the teams at the start of the playoffs. Essentially, you would eliminate the separate AFC/NFC playoff trees, and combine them. You could still give #1 through #4 their first round byes, just like it is currently, but the playoffs would not make distinctions between AFC and NFC teams anymore. You could end up with a cross conference first round matchup between the Ravens and Falcons for example, and a Packers/Saints Super Bowl, if that's how it worked out. The AFL no longer exists. It hasn't for over 40 years. It's not like MLB, where the rules are slightly different between the two, it's one league, one set of rules for everybody. No reason to keep AFC and NFC teams isolated from each other in the playoffs anymore. You could even still bracket them into two regions of 6, like the current structure, but seeded differently, closer to the NCAA Basketball tournament style.

Anyway, those are just some of my thoughts. What rule changes would you make to the sport of your choice?

 

[J.J.]

Roughing the passer - If I'm a 300lbs guy on the front defensive line running full force and just so happens he releases the ball a second before I get to him I cannot stop on a dime to avoid hitting him.

The endzone celebrations were fine, Chad Ochocinco got out of hand a little, but it was amusing to see what TO, Chad and Steve Smith were going to do every Sunday.

Feel Roger Goodell is sucking the fun right out the sport.

 

[Davi323]

Roughing the passer - If I'm a 300lbs guy on the front defensive line running full force and just so happens he releases the ball a second before I get to him I cannot stop on a dime to avoid hitting him.

Inertia is a bitch, isn't it? Agreed.

 

[Stormtrooper]

2. Completing the process. Yeah. As a Lions fan, I am still pissed off at that rule. Let me get this straight...if Calvin Johnson had caught the ball at the 1 yard line, and that exact same motion would have happened, so that he set the ball down in the endzone, but crossed the plane, it would have been a Touchdown. But because he was ALREADY IN THE ENDZONE, and caught it, it was actually an incomplete pass. BULLSHIT. If all you have to do is cross the plane with the ball for it to be a TD, you should only have to catch the ball, none of that bullshit football moves after the catch nonsense.

The rule is the same for the entire length of the football field....
Yeah, they do need better clarification on the rule though. "completing the process of the catch" is too vague. The idea is right (a falling receiver needs to maintain possession of the football), but the wording causes issues.

3. More consistency with elbows and knees. Currently, you need to have both feet inbounds for it to be ruled a valid catch. However, you only need one knee down in order for you to be considered tackled. This needs to change. If you want to keep one body part means you are down, then the out of bounds rule should be consistent to that. IE, the college rule, where one foot in with possession of the ball is considered in. If one knee is good enough for you to be down, it should also be good enough for you to be inbounds.

Actually, 1 knee IS good enough to be considered inbounds. 1 knee = 2 feet in football (or 1 ass cheek, elbow, shoulder, etc)

4. This one is far more radical. Reseed the teams at the start of the playoffs. Essentially, you would eliminate the separate AFC/NFC playoff trees, and combine them. You could still give #1 through #4 their first round byes, just like it is currently, but the playoffs would not make distinctions between AFC and NFC teams anymore. You could end up with a cross conference first round matchup between the Ravens and Falcons for example, and a Packers/Saints Super Bowl, if that's how it worked out. The AFL no longer exists. It hasn't for over 40 years. It's not like MLB, where the rules are slightly different between the two, it's one league, one set of rules for everybody. No reason to keep AFC and NFC teams isolated from each other in the playoffs anymore. You could even still bracket them into two regions of 6, like the current structure, but seeded differently, closer to the NCAA Basketball tournament style.

The only issue with that is that the NFC teams don't play the same teams as the AFC teams, which is why the playoffs are segregated.


As for the rules I would change?

1. the NFL replay system. Teams should have challenges, but only lose one if the call stands/is confirmed. Why punish a team for getting a call correct? Also, the booth upstairs should have more opportunity to call for a replay then just on scoring plays, inside of the 2 minute warning, and in OT.

2. The BCS National Championship game should rotate not to bowl sites, but to regions. One year in the Southeast (Atlanta/New Orleans), One in the South/Southwest (Dallas/Phoenix), one on the West Coast (LA Stadium/Rose Bowl), one in Big 10 country (Ford Field/Soldier Field), one in the Northeast (MetLife Stadium/Gillette Stadium). No more bias towards the south and warm weather teams.

 

[CDR]

1. Get the BCS out of college football. If there was ever a time to believe that the BCS is terrible, it would be this year. This bowl season alone saw too many teams getting screwed out of game they should be in. The National Championship game is a joke. If LSU wins, nothing is accomplished. We already know they can beat Alabama. If Alabama wins, nobody knows who the true champion is. Houston loses 1 game and goes to a crappy bowl game. That leads me to my next one.

2. Eliminate major conferences in college football. Keep the playing field level. This way, if a team like Houston goes undefeated, they will have beaten atleast one or two good teams. If they're forced to play crappy teams, the excuse that they haven't played anybody good will always exist. I say, put together 6 or so conferences with about 20 teams in each. Divide them up into 2 parts, or divisions. Find a winner for each division and have them each play each other to determine a conference champion. From there, place the best in bowls against each other and finish it off tourney style.

3. Eh, I'll come up with more later.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Personally I don't like sudden death overtime in the NFL. Two teams have a hard fought battle for four physical quarters, but end up with a tied score. So what do they do, they flip a coin to decide who gets possession. Then, one team has the ability to drive however many necessary yards down the field, kick a game winning field goal, and the other team never even gets an offensive possession. Sure, some would say it's the defense's fault for not stopping the game winning drive, but I am not buying it. If one team scores on one possession, the other team has to have least one possession for the opportunity to equal or beat the other. You cannot lose an overtime game without even having a chance to score, basically losing the game due to a lost coin toss.

 

[Davi323]

The rule is the same for the entire length of the football field....
Yeah, they do need better clarification on the rule though. "completing the process of the catch" is too vague. The idea is right (a falling receiver needs to maintain possession of the football), but the wording causes issues.

Except it isn't. If a wide receiver catches the ball at the 1 yard line, and falls into the endzone but loses possession of the ball while he is still falling, as long as he had possession of the ball when the tip of the ball crossed that imaginary plane into the endzone, it's a TD. He does not need to maintain possession of the ball all the way down to the ground. In Calvin Johnson's case, as soon as his feet hit the ground in the endzone, it should have been a touchdown. Everyone who saw the play knows it was really a touchdown. If you instinctively KNOW it was a touchdown just by looking, then the rules should reflect that.

The only issue with that is that the NFC teams don't play the same teams as the AFC teams, which is why the playoffs are segregated.

Umm, that's not really true. Using the Detroit Lions as an example, they had the entire AFC West on their schedule. They had 6 NFC non-divisional opponents, and 4 AFC opponents on the schedule. The scheduling could easily be changed too. Teams play 10 non-divisional games a year...if you are willing to reseed the playoffs, why wouldn't you also be willing to balance the non-divisional games to 5/5 instead of 6/4? It's only a one game difference.

 

[Stormtrooper]

Except it isn't. If a wide receiver catches the ball at the 1 yard line, and falls into the endzone but loses possession of the ball while he is still falling, as long as he had possession of the ball when the tip of the ball crossed that imaginary plane into the endzone, it's a TD. He does not need to maintain possession of the ball all the way down to the ground. In Calvin Johnson's case, as soon as his feet hit the ground in the endzone, it should have been a touchdown. Everyone who saw the play knows it was really a touchdown. If you instinctively KNOW it was a touchdown just by looking, then the rules should reflect that.

Yeah it is true actually. If the guy makes a falling catch anywhere on the field, it is subject to the completing the catch thing. You're talking about a different topic all together, where a guy makes a standing catch, runs and dives into the end zone. That is different then diving/falling to make a catch.

Umm, that's not really true. Using the Detroit Lions as an example, they had the entire AFC West on their schedule. They had 6 NFC non-divisional opponents, and 4 AFC opponents on the schedule. The scheduling could easily be changed too. Teams play 10 non-divisional games a year...if you are willing to reseed the playoffs, why wouldn't you also be willing to balance the non-divisional games to 5/5 instead of 6/4? It's only a one game difference.

The first non Head-to-Head Tiebreaker for wildcard playoff scenarios is common opponent, and that is what usually ends up deciding the playoffs. You can't do that with teams from different conferences, since they would be lucky to have 1 common opponent. Hence why that's difficult.

They would have to re-do the entire regular season scheduling structure in order for that to work. That, or institute a ranking system to rank all 32 teams. doing either of those would be deadly.

And how do you suppose we choose the 5 non-division teams in each conference? Right now they rotate one in-conference division and the teams from the other in-conference divisions that finished in the same place as you. 5 and 5 would be impossible.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

In soccer, I would put a halt to the removal of a shirt and/or celebration with fans being an instant yellow card offense.

Sometimes players get caught up in the moment and need a release after scoring a crucial goal, so punishing them for something as dramatic as that seems ridiculous. Granted, if a player scores then goes out of their way to taunt opposition fans then a punishment should be doled out. If a fan favourite scores the winning goal in the last minute and celebrates with the home fans or relieves himself of his shirt in a burst of energy, that shouldn't be punished.

There are cases of players being shown the yellow card for lifting their shirt up to reveal a message to someone which again seems ridiculous. If they are revealing an inflammatory message then yes, punishment makes sense. If they are revealing a message to their family or in memory of a friend/relative, that does not deserve punishment.

 

[Davi323]

Yeah it is true actually. If the guy makes a falling catch anywhere on the field, it is subject to the completing the catch thing. You're talking about a different topic all together, where a guy makes a standing catch, runs and dives into the end zone. That is different then diving/falling to make a catch.

Calvin Johnson DID make a standing catch though, he had control of the ball with both feet on the ground...it was only AFTER that that he lost his balance. The catch in the endzone was already established. Not only did he have two feet touch the ground with possession, but he also got his other hand AND his hip on the ground before allegedly losing the ball. (I say allegedly, because it's entirely possible he simple let go of the ball, thinking the play was over, as he did not appear to lose control of the ball at any point prior). This is a touchdown. Everyone who saw it knows it was a touchdown. Even Bears fans know it was a touchdown. The completing the process rule needs to go.

The first non Head-to-Head Tiebreaker for wildcard playoff scenarios is common opponent, and that is what usually ends up deciding the playoffs. You can't do that with teams from different conferences, since they would be lucky to have 1 common opponent. Hence why that's difficult.

Why? Why is it too difficult when you play 5 non-conference opponents, but not too difficult when you play 4? Also, who says you can't adjust the tiebreaker rules accordingly? If you change the rules, and it affects one tiebreaker, you would just move on to the next tiebreaker.

They would have to re-do the entire regular season scheduling structure in order for that to work. That, or institute a ranking system to rank all 32 teams. doing either of those would be deadly.

Yeah, they would have to redo regular season schedules. So?

Ranking all 32 teams? Why? All I am suggesting is that once you make the playoffs, following the current structure, once you have your 12 playoff teams, you seed them without concern for what conference they came from. The NCAA Tournament does it with 65 teams, why would it suddenly be impossible with only 12? Division Champions would get seeded #1 through #8, and the wildcards would get #9 through #12, based on record. The actual structure of the playoffs would remain unchanged, with 4 teams getting 1st round byes and all of that, all I am saying is that you don't need to have all of the AFC teams on one side, and all of the NFC teams on the other. The distinction between the AFC and NFC is completely arbitrary. They could just as easily be named Division 1, Division 2, Division 3, etc. with absolutely no reference to either the AFC or NFC. The NFL is one league, not two. But, for the sake of convenience, let's keep the current division names as a way to describe each division.

And how do you suppose we choose the 5 non-division teams in each conference? Right now they rotate one in-conference division and the teams from the other in-conference divisions that finished in the same place as you. 5 and 5 would be impossible.

Play the same place team from the other 7 divisions, plus the other three from one division that rotates every year. You would always play at least one team from each division in the NFL, and then rotate divisions.

OR

You could set it up so that you always played your counterpart division to develop regional rivalries. For example, the NFC North would always play the 3 remaining AFC North teams in addition to the one that matched their finish the year previous, the NFC East would always play the AFC East, etc.

6 intra-division games
7 same place games
3 additional games from one rotating division (excluding the team you played as part of the same place), or a permanent rival division.
= 16 games total.

Either way, the scheduling is not as difficult as you are making it out to be.

 

[Барбоса]

If there is one thing I do not like about sports it is the exploiting of the rules for gamesmanship such as in rugby where it has become the done thing to punt to ball into touch to end the game once the clock has passed 80mins.

In a similar vein, in American Football, I hate the taking of a knee to virtually end the game early.

However, unfortunately, there is probably absolutely nothing that can be done about these instances because it is a not a bad rule but a manipulation of rules that govern other parts of the game.

 

[Stormtrooper]

Calvin Johnson DID make a standing catch though, he had control of the ball with both feet on the ground...it was only AFTER that that he lost his balance. The catch in the endzone was already established. Not only did he have two feet touch the ground with possession, but he also got his other hand AND his hip on the ground before allegedly losing the ball. (I say allegedly, because it's entirely possible he simple let go of the ball, thinking the play was over, as he did not appear to lose control of the ball at any point prior). This is a touchdown. Everyone who saw it knows it was a touchdown. Even Bears fans know it was a touchdown. The completing the process rule needs to go.

Nah, it wasn't even close to a standing catch. It was a falling catch. A standing catch is when the guy is standing, catches the ball, and is still standing. Calvin was clearly going to the ground. Thus he needed to complete the process of the catch.

Why? Why is it too difficult when you play 5 non-conference opponents, but not too difficult when you play 4? Also, who says you can't adjust the tiebreaker rules accordingly? If you change the rules, and it affects one tiebreaker, you would just move on to the next tiebreaker.

OK, the next tiebreaker is strength of victory. You wanna be putting teams in the playoffs based on how they win? That's pretty shitty.

Yeah, they would have to redo regular season schedules. So?

There's nothing wrong with the schedule or the playoffs now. Why are we changing something that isn't broke, for the sole purpose of eliminating the 2 conferences?

Ranking all 32 teams? Why? All I am suggesting is that once you make the playoffs, following the current structure, once you have your 12 playoff teams, you seed them without concern for what conference they came from.

Well, because then you're gonna have a bunch of teams with the same record fighting for 1 or 2 playoff spots left, and the only way to differentiate is by ranking them.

The NCAA Tournament does it with 65 teams, why would it suddenly be impossible with only 12? Division Champions would get seeded #1 through #8, and the wildcards would get #9 through #12, based on record. The actual structure of the playoffs would remain unchanged, with 4 teams getting 1st round byes and all of that, all I am saying is that you don't need to have all of the AFC teams on one side, and all of the NFC teams on the other. The distinction between the AFC and NFC is completely arbitrary. They could just as easily be named Division 1, Division 2, Division 3, etc. with absolutely no reference to either the AFC or NFC. The NFL is one league, not two.

The American League and National League are 1 league too, but you don't want to abandon those conferences.

But, for the sake of convenience, let's keep the current division names as a way to describe each division.

Play the same place team from the other 7 divisions, plus the other three from one division that rotates every year. You would always play at least one team from each division in the NFL, and then rotate divisions.

using this model, the "record vs. common opponents" tiebreaker is completely meaningless (it currently is extremely important). It'll be all but impossible for 2 or 3 teams to play enough common opponents for that to work.

OR

You could set it up so that you always played your counterpart division to develop regional rivalries. For example, the NFC North would always play the 3 remaining AFC North teams in addition to the one that matched their finish the year previous, the NFC East would always play the AFC East, etc.

6 intra-division games
7 same place games
3 additional games from one rotating division (excluding the team you played as part of the same place), or a permanent rival division.
= 16 games total.

And how does that work? Who would Miami (AFC East) play in the NFL East to make a "regional rival"? And why should the Jets have to play the Giants every year, whereas the Redskins get to play the Patriots or Bills? How is that fair to either team? It's like InterLeague Play where the Mets have to play the Yankees 6 times, but the Cardinals get to play the Royals. When you play 162 games and all ties are settled in a 163rd game, it's not the end of the world. But when you only play 16 games, having to consistently play a dominant team when your division rival (who you're competing with) has to play a cupcake ruins the formula.

Either way, the scheduling is not as difficult as you are making it out to be.

Yeah it is.

Hey, if we're gonna eliminate the inter-conference seeding for the playoffs, why don't we just allow the teams so set their own schedules just like in the NCAA? That'll work...

 

[Stormtrooper]

If there is one thing I do not like about sports it is the exploiting of the rules for gamesmanship

In a similar vein, in American Football, I hate the taking of a knee to virtually end the game early.

However, unfortunately, there is probably absolutely nothing that can be done about these instances because it is a not a bad rule but a manipulation of rules that govern other parts of the game.

The whole taking a knee to kill the clock is only about 30-35 years old. You used to have to get beyond the line of scrimmage for the clock to keep running. But a combination of player safety and a team getting burned by not being able to kneel down led them to allowing the kneeldown.

 

[Барбоса]

The whole taking a knee to kill the clock is only about 30-35 years old. You used to have to get beyond the line of scrimmage for the clock to keep running. But a combination of player safety and a team getting burned by not being able to kneel down led them to allowing the kneeldown.

As I said, there is probably a legitimate reason for its existence but that does not mean I have to like how it is taken advantage of to kill perhaps over two minutes at the end of a game.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Yeah there needs to be zero changes to the schedule/seeding process in football. It's by far the best system in sports.

A couple of thins though.

1. Not for any real reason, but it'd be cool if they'd implement the College rule on PATs, where you can return a blocked kick, pick, or fumble for a Safety. Not necessary, but it could be fun.

2. I want stats on referees and their schedules. I want to know what each specific ref team is known for making bad calls and what kinds of things they tend to call more than others. Basically, I want them to be held to a higher standard. They have way too much of a negative effect on the games and they make too much money for them to not have to face any scrutiny.

 

[Unsold Bacon]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Tuck Rule.

Also I believe the stupidest rule in the history of sports is the single in Canadian Football. If you miss a field goal but it lands in the end zone you get a point same with a punt.
Imagine it's the championship final and it's tied. The team goes for field goal, misses it but it lands in the end zone. THEY STILL WIN THE GAME!!

 

[Daniel]

Have a separate division for athletes who take performance enhancing drugs.

 

[Davi323]

Well, because then you're gonna have a bunch of teams with the same record fighting for 1 or 2 playoff spots left

This is different than what we have now, exactly? The reseeding doesn't happen until after the playoff field is already set. IE, doesn't occur until after the last game of week 17 is finished, and only involving the 12 teams that made the playoffs. Were you under the impression that I was talking about seeding teams DURING the season, like some kind of BCS Ranking or something?

The American League and National League are 1 league too, but you don't want to abandon those conferences.

The American and National Leagues have slightly different rules. If the AL eliminated the DH or the NL adopted the DH, making their rules 100% identical, then I would argue that those conferences are completely arbitrary too. Because they do have different rules, it does make sense to keep them separate. I also don't object to the NBA having Eastern and Western conferences. The division between the two conferences is geographically based to cut down transportation costs and other logistical issues. Okay, I can understand that. But there is no logical reason to maintain the NFC/AFC split for any reason other than tradition.

And how does that work? Who would Miami (AFC East) play in the NFL East to make a "regional rival"?

You misunderstood me: not talking about an individual team vs. team rivalry. It would be the entire NFC East vs. the entire AFC East. So, your division rival would have to play the same teams you would. The Giants would always play the Patriots, Bills, Jets and Dolphins, as would the Cowboys Eagles and Redskins. If you had two teams tied in a division, there would be four guaranteed common opponents, just like there is now. The only difference is that it would be the same four teams each year, rather than a rotating schedule. I would rather keep the rotating divisional scheduling, the permanent rival division thing was just offered as an alternative.

 

[Davi323]

Have a separate division for athletes who take performance enhancing drugs.

They do. it's called Major League Baseball.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Have a separate division for athletes who take performance enhancing drugs.

I'd rather ALL athletes take performance enhancement drugs.

 

[Lee]

Yeah there needs to be zero changes to the schedule/seeding process in football. It's by far the best system in sports.

A couple of thins though.

1. Not for any real reason, but it'd be cool if they'd implement the College rule on PATs, where you can return a blocked kick, pick, or fumble for a Safety. Not necessary, but it could be fun.

2. I want stats on referees and their schedules. I want to know what each specific ref team is known for making bad calls and what kinds of things they tend to call more than others. Basically, I want them to be held to a higher standard. They have way too much of a negative effect on the games and they make too much money for them to not have to face any scrutiny.

This x 100

 

[Daniel]

They do. it's called Major League Baseball.

If I was American and enjoyed sports, I'd no doubt be saying "hiyoooo".

 

[Davi323]

I'd rather ALL athletes take performance enhancement drugs.

That's one way to do it...if both the pitcher and batter are on PEDs, who really has the advantage?

 

[Daniel]

I'd rather ALL athletes take performance enhancement drugs.

That works too. As long as I get to see a man run the 100m in 2.3 seconds, I don't care how they do it.

 

[Nate DaMac]

That's one way to do it...if both the pitcher and batter are on PEDs, who really has the advantage?

Exactly.

I'd have so much more to add to this thread if it were in The Bar Room.