There are a few new rule changes that are going to be proposed to the owners in next week's league meetings. None of them are altogether major except for an attempt to change some of the rules associated to Injured Reserve. For any of these rules to change the owners will need to agree to them with a 3/4 majority. That means 24 out of the 32 voting members would have to agree in order to change any of the rules. The proposed rule changes and my own opinion of each are after the Jump.
- Changing the overtime rules in the regular season to match the ones used in the playoffs pertaining to winning the game on a field goal on the first drive. The proposed change would make the rule of not being able to win on the first drive of overtime with a field goal apply to regular season games too.
This is likely to pass due to the owners wanting to allow the teams to prepare for that rule the same way throughout the year, instead of having to remember that it is different for in overtime of playoff games. Games could still end in ties during the regular season where they can not in the playoffs.
It seemed really silly to me to not have this rule applied to the regular season to begin with, so I am definitely fine with them changing the rule now. Why have that different anyway?!
- The 12 men on the field penalty changing to a dead ball foul immediately stopping play.
I don't necessarily agree with this rule change. It has come to light because of a 12 men on the field penalty against the Giants in the Super Bowl where the Patriots still ran a play and lost time on the clock because of having to do so.
This seems like a bit of an over reaction to me, since it takes away the chance for a team to have a free play that they can be more aggressive on. I say leave this rule alone. I like the moments in games were teams get to just air it out because they know that the play wont matter if it goes wrong.
It seems to me like this rule change would be more beneficial to the team that made the mistake of having 12 men on the field than to the team that would be accepting the penalty.
- Automatically having turnovers reviewed
This one makes a lot of sense. If they review all scoring plays they might as well review all turnovers too. They are major plays which are often ones that mistakes are made on anyway.
- All Review decisions being made by the separate official in the booth instead of the on field official.
YES! DO IT! I am so sick of allowing the Ref that made the bad call to review the play. These men have egos too and some of the Refs do not like to admit when they are wrong. I know for a fact that I have watched reviews take place where it was obvious that the Ref made the wrong call but he refused to overturn it. This rule change removes the chance of a Ref's ego getting in the way. I am 100% for this rule change and I think it would speed up the reviews as well.
- Allowing players placed on Injured Reserve to come back to the active roster later in the season.
I think this is a little silly. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind having a player that suffered a serious injury in the beginning of the year not taking up a roster spot while injured and still being able to return by the end of the year. However, to me it seems to go directly against the point of the rule.
The rule was made to allow you to keep the player that got hurt on the team and under contract while not taking up a roster spot for that year since he can't play anymore. To me to now make it possible for that player to return later in the year really belittles the IR rule in place.
It would help teams a lot, but then it seems like there is no point to even have an IR option anymore if that is the case. To me it seems like then any injured player who can't play for a game shouldn't count towards the roster for the time span that they can not suit up if this rule would be changed. My personal opinion is to leave this rule alone too.
The only thing that I am disappointed with not being brought up out of these rules is that I feel like potential scoring plays should automatically be reviewed too. It doesn't make sense to me to have a play ruled a catch for a TD be automatically reviewed but a possible catch ruled incomplete that would have been a TD not automatically be reviewed.