American Football AH Question

zoomar

Watching this weekend's NFL playoff games and noting the fact that American football has become so much a game dependent on the forward pass, and all the stoppages of play these cause I started wondering......

....what if, in response to the push by TR and others to reform the collegiate game, the rules for legalizing the forward pass made it a live ball like a kickoff or lateral pass? Incomplete or dropped passes ahead of the scrimmage line would be treated as fumbles. They could be recovered by either side, and advanced by either side. How would the pass be used? What sort of game would evolve from this?
 
Jasen777

Jasen777

Donor
I think that actually was the rule at one point (although I can't remember when).

Obviously, teams would pass alot less and the running game would be alot more important. Real short passes (like to a back out of the backfield) and laterals may still be used, along with really long passes.

Safeties would have to stay far back to prevent the offense from throwing the ball all the way down the field and recovering it. Punters would be out of a job, as teams will have their quarterback throw the ball to the end zone (or as far as possible) in a sort of combination hail-mary and punt instead.
 

zoomar

Sort of what I thought too. If safeties and defensive backs stay far back to guard against long recoverable bombs, that might paradoxically make the pass more important than now because the completion rate on short passes might be even better. It would also open up the running game because, as you said, the defense might have to play looser formations to consider the possibility that on 3rd and 1 the QB might just heave the ball downfield as a live ball and hope his guys get down on it. Personally, I think it might make the game more exciting.
 
Jasen777

Jasen777

Donor
It would pretty much be a different game.

Completion percentage might go up, but only because no one would throw anything other than easy, wide open passes. Except for the throwing it all the way down the field pass that is.
 

kingdobbs

Pretty much all of these suggestions are possibilities.

I don't think it would change the run/pass dynamic much, at least as far as pro football goes. Maybe in the lower levels, as the talent levels are lower, coaches would be less likely to take big chances with less-sure handed receivers. The long forward pass would still be important strategically to stretch out and wear out the defensive backfield.

It would certainly change the desired traits coaches look for in the skill positions: speed would be less important for the wide receivers compared to having sure hands, though being able to do the big downfield sprint will still be vital. Quarterbacks, too, will have to have more of an emphasis on accuracy rather than arm strength, and their ability to manage the game will be as important, if not more so. Since down field passes are riskier, they'll have to be better at reading defenses and making snap decisions. Defenses would need quicker reflexes, as any tipped ball potentially becomes a defensive touchdown, and would be trained to keep their eyes on the ball always.

One important thing, though, is the necessary rules changes to how the ball can interact with the sideline. As it stands, a quarterback outside of the pocket can toss the ball to the sideline without a grounding penalty, and it's simply an incompletion. Likewise, any fumble that goes out of bounds is given to the last team to possess the ball, at the spot where the ball left the field. Combining the two would be dangerous; any team given the opportunity to advance the ball just by lobbing a pass at the sidelines would take it in a heartbeat. You would have to adjust both rules; the best way I can think of would be to have an "illegal forward pass to the sideline" penalty, replacing intentional grounding (which would become a null penalty given that incompletions are live), which applies to passes which go out of bounds untouched.
 

zoomar

kingdobbs said:
\
One important thing, though, is the necessary rules changes to how the ball can interact with the sideline. As it stands, a quarterback outside of the pocket can toss the ball to the sideline without a grounding penalty, and it's simply an incompletion. Likewise, any fumble that goes out of bounds is given to the last team to possess the ball, at the spot where the ball left the field. Combining the two would be dangerous; any team given the opportunity to advance the ball just by lobbing a pass at the sidelines would take it in a heartbeat. You would have to adjust both rules; the best way I can think of would be to have an "illegal forward pass to the sideline" penalty, replacing intentional grounding (which would become a null penalty given that incompletions are live), which applies to passes which go out of bounds untouched.
Click to expand...

Good point. I have two other ideas, both which involve treating a forward pass different from a fumble if it goes out of bounds without first being in the possession of a player other than the passer: Either (1) treat a pass out of bounds the same as a pass out of bounds in basketball (ie: it is a turnover and the defending team gets posession at that spot), or (2) put it in play with rugby-like scrum formation to allow either side to win possession.

I suppose one would also have to figure out what would happen if a pass goes untouched thru an endzone. There might need to be special rules to cover this.
 

zoomar

Jasen777 said:
Probably be called a touchback.
Click to expand...

If it were treated as a fumble, yes, but I could see other alternatives including:
(1) placing a net at the back of the enzone and keeping it a live ball
(2) considering a pass which goes thru the endzone a 1 point "rouge" as a kick in Canadian football.

But actually the touchback might be the best
 
Kevin in Indy

Kevin in Indy

What if the pass out of bounds was put back in play at the previous line of scrimmage if it were touched first but penalize the quarterback "throwing the ball out of bounds" by putting an untouched out-of-bounds pass back in play from the spot at which it was thrown? The precision passers might prefer sideline patterns, figuring that an incompletion might be safely knocked out of bounds.

I'm not sure how the penalties for pass interferance evolved. That would require some research.

Imagine - the rules favoring gigantic sure-handed pass receiving fullbacks such as Dan Klecko - oh, wait.... :rolleyes:
 

zoomar

I'd rather a pass out of bounds be a turnover. The precision sideline pass game is, to me, boring. I'd rather these rules foster down the middle passes and runs after the catch than somebody falling out of bounds on a 4 yard sideline pass.
 

kingdobbs

Kevin in Indy said:
I'm not sure how the penalties for pass interferance evolved. That would require some research.
Click to expand...

Got it.

Defensive pass interference was enacted in 1978, as an attempt to curtail the physical style of play of dominant Steelers cornerback Mel Blount (before this rule, defenders were allowed to contact the receivers until the ball was in the air; now it's illegal beyond five yards from the line of scrimmage) and to hopefully open the passing game up for many teams in an effort to create more excitement.

Offensive pass interference came about in the 1990s, preventing receivers from pushing off of defenders to try and make catches, again to curtail the physical style of Cowboys receiver Michael Irvin (who also has the taunting penalty credited to him).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top