What Would You Think Of This Rule Change?

[Fryowa]

If a team is backed up in their own territory far enough that full penalty yardage can't be applied, the ball goes on the 1 yard line and the first down is moved out farther to make up the balance of the yardage.

So if you're on your own 2 yard line and false start, the ball goes on the 1 and the line to gain moves out 4 yards.

 

[dagdaj]

At first thought, it works for me.
But, I do reserve the right to sort of think about it a little further. The magnitude of the penalty is increased simply because of field position. Granted, a penalty is a penalty. But depending on where you are on the field, the magnitude of the 'sentence' is amplified.

I mean, I can't help but to think of the French dude who only stole the bread to feed his family.

My rule change is this. If you initiate touching a guy once he's crossed out of the big wide white stripe on the sideline, you are ejected and ineligible just like targeting. Otherwise, you're free to make contact and the ball handler should be prepared for it. Or I dunno, you can still call late hits if you want, but maybe make it a 5 or 10 yard. Just to try to make it a more binary call. I really haven't thought it through.

Also, I really don't know enough about the nuts and bolts of actually playing football to know about the unintended consequences of my idea. I just hate the meandering subjectivity in football.

I can stomach it a bit better in basketball. I mean, if you know how they're tending to call things, you can adapt. Baseball....same way. If the ump is giving you phantom corners, both batter and pitcher know. Football, one singular (except holding calls/no calls) call can really result in a game changer.

 

[Fryowa]

At first thought, it works for me.
But, I do reserve the right to sort of think about it a little further. The magnitude of the penalty is increased simply because of field position.

I'd argue that the magnitude of the penalty decreased because of field position. Which I think would be against the spirit of the penalty.

In my mind if a penalty for say, a false start is supposed to be 5 yards...it should be 5 yards anywhere on the field.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

If a team is backed up in their own territory far enough that full penalty yardage can't be applied, the ball goes on the 1 yard line and the first down is moved out farther to make up the balance of the yardage.

So if you're on your own 2 yard line and false start, the ball goes on the 1 and the line to gain moves out 4 yards.

I was told there'd be no math when I logged on here... Yeah that'd be great actually. Cause otherwise those false starts end up being all but nothing.

 

[MikeyLikesIowa]

If a team is backed up in their own territory far enough that full penalty yardage can't be applied, the ball goes on the 1 yard line and the first down is moved out farther to make up the balance of the yardage.

So if you're on your own 2 yard line and false start, the ball goes on the 1 and the line to gain moves out 4 yards.

I like it. I've always thought it was odd that penalties near the goal line weren't enforced like this anyways.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

I don't like it, but I am old and set in my ways and don't like change. Beyond my desire for people to stay off my grass, it only expands the field one way. It punishes the offense if they are backed up, but should there not be a reciprocal punishment for the defense when they are defending the goal line? Instead of half the distance to the goal on a defensive penalty inside the 10, you mark off the full punishment until you get to the 1. If you get a penalty on the defense when its inside the 1, the center gets to kick the noseguard in the nuts with no penalty.

 

[Fryowa]

It punishes the offense if they are backed up, but should there not be a reciprocal punishment for the defense when they are defending the goal line?

I actually like that idea. If you commit a foul which would result in the ball moving past the goal line, the offense scores the TD. No different than a defensive off sides on 3rd and 2 resulting in a first down.

To me you shouldn't lessen the impact of a penalty to the offense or defense based on either side's field position.

If the rule says a violation results in a penalty of 10 yards, it results in a penalty of 10 yards. If that 10 yards results in the ball moving over the goal line, you shouldn't have committed the foul.

And let's be real, it'd be more fun. No one thinks it's exciting when you have multiple "half the distance" penalties that do nothing to affect the drive.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

I like the idea, but something is needed for the defense in similar situations. Several years ago the NFL changed the holding penalty to a safety if it occured in the end zone, I'm sure in part because they recognized the lack of consequences. But, should a holding penalty that occurs 6 in outside of the goal line necessarily be different than one that occurs 6 in within the goal, in which case the penalty would be moving the ball back 3 inches and replaying the down?

I posted something similar quite a while ago. To me, "Half the distance to the goal line" never made much sense. All it does is incentivize the offense or defense to take chances, especially the defense, as you can try to jump the snap count knowing that if you get caught the penalty may only be six inches or whatever.

Enforcing the yards past the goal line would result in TD for the offense or a safety for the defense, so there would be a disparity in the points awarded. I guess one could argue that it would even out over time.

An interesting alternative would be to award the opposing team one point whenever a penalty results in, say, less than 2 yds. Awarding points occurs in other sports, and that would add a whole new element of tension in games.

 

[guffus]

Or for anything inside the 30-yard line, you dont move the ball at all. Just move the first down marker the length of the penalty.