I don't mind the two foot rule. These are pros...they're supposed to be able to do things that "amateurs" can't.

 

However, if there was one college rule that I WOULD like to see in place (but ONLY inside the last two minutes of each half) is the clock stopping momentarily for the chains to get moved. I just hate seeing a team being "penalized" (losing time on the clock) because of the slowness of the officials in getting the chains moved, ball spotted and put into play. I think this could lead to some more dramatic come-from-behind moments, because teams (on offense) could use the entire field instead of just the sidelines (especially if they are out of timeouts). Just my opinion.

 

I don't mind this rule either....I think you should play it one way the whole game. Any rule that fundamentally changes how you play for only a portion of the game is bad. Why just the last two minutes?? Why not the last four, or the whole game?? If it's bad for the rest of the game, it shouldn't be implemented to artificially make a game more dramatic. It also takes the whole time management part of coaching out of the game. Time outs become less important, and it puts even more pressure on the defense. And honestly, I can't remember a time where a team has lost a game because of officials not being able to get the ball placed or chains moved.

I don't mind this rule either....I think you should play it one way the whole game. Any rule that fundamentally changes how you play for only a portion of the game is bad. Why just the last two minutes?? Why not the last four, or the whole game?? If it's bad for the rest of the game, it shouldn't be implemented to artificially make a game more dramatic. It also takes the whole time management part of coaching out of the game. Time outs become less important, and it puts even more pressure on the defense. And honestly, I can't remember a time where a team has lost a game because of officials not being able to get the ball placed or chains moved.

 

I used 2 minutes because that's about the time that the NFL distinguishes other rule "changes"...no coaches' challenges inside of 2 minutes...if you've got an injured player during that time frame (and you're trailing), you lose a timeout (or 10 second clock run off)...likewise, if you commit a penalty within a certain time frame, it can lead to a 10 second clock run off...if you fumble inside 2 minutes, only the player who fumbled it can recover it AND advance it. All of these don't take place during the entire game. But, they were put in for a reason.

I used 2 minutes because that's about the time that the NFL distinguishes other rule "changes"...no coaches' challenges inside of 2 minutes...if you've got an injured player during that time frame (and you're trailing), you lose a timeout (or 10 second clock run off)...likewise, if you commit a penalty within a certain time frame, it can lead to a 10 second clock run off...if you fumble inside 2 minutes, only the player who fumbled it can recover it AND advance it. All of these don't take place during the entire game. But, they were put in for a reason.

 

I understand where you're coming from, but none of those rules fundamentally change the way you play the game, or game strategy. Those rules mostly close loopholes that could allow you to manipulate time to your advantage and are kind of one off situations. Stopping the clock after a 1st down does change strategy, and is profoundly different from the way you play the entire game. Time outs are no longer as important, and it gives the offense a big advantage at the end of the game.

I understand where you're coming from, but none of those rules fundamentally change the way you play the game, or game strategy. Those rules mostly close loopholes that could allow you to manipulate time to your advantage and are kind of one off situations. Stopping the clock after a 1st down does change strategy, and is profoundly different from the way you play the entire game. Time outs are no longer as important, and it gives the offense a big advantage at the end of the game.

 

Of course, one could argue that the current system DOES change the way you play the game at the end. Instead of having to defend the entire field like you've done for nearly the entire game, defenses now are able to get away with putting guys deep and toward the sidelines. For the majority of the game, the sideline is usually the defender's friend...but, when it gets down to crunch time, suddenly it's their enemy?

 

All I'm saying is this...to eliminate a 3rd party (the officials) from potentially having any impact on the clock...or to eliminate the effect from defenders "piling on"...and to have more "reasonable" (and potentially dramatic) last-second plays...it's the one rule that would be fairly easy to implement.

 

I don't believe it would have much, if any impact on how coaches use their timeouts. I mean, they're already using them on the defensive end to stop the clock when they're hoping to get the ball back. Why would that change? And if you're on offense (and ahead), it's only a momentary stoppage, so you can still milk the clock once the ball's been put back in play.

 

Is it going to make or break the NFL? No way. I was just saying that if there was one college rule (ala one foot inbounds) to implement in the NFL, this would be the one that I would want. But, even then, only for a limited time period.

Of course, one could argue that the current system DOES change the way you play the game at the end. Instead of having to defend the entire field like you've done for nearly the entire game, defenses now are able to get away with putting guys deep and toward the sidelines. For the majority of the game, the sideline is usually the defender's friend...but, when it gets down to crunch time, suddenly it's their enemy?

 

All I'm saying is this...to eliminate a 3rd party (the officials) from potentially having any impact on the clock...or to eliminate the effect from defenders "piling on"...and to have more "reasonable" (and potentially dramatic) last-second plays...it's the one rule that would be fairly easy to implement.

 

I don't believe it would have much, if any impact on how coaches use their timeouts. I mean, they're already using them on the defensive end to stop the clock when they're hoping to get the ball back. Why would that change? And if you're on offense (and ahead), it's only a momentary stoppage, so you can still milk the clock once the ball's been put back in play.

 

Is it going to make or break the NFL? No way. I was just saying that if there was one college rule (ala one foot inbounds) to implement in the NFL, this would be the one that I would want. But, even then, only for a limited time period.

 

I get it. I guess the biggest thing, is I don't see where many, if any games are won and lost because an official doesn't get the ball placed quickly, or because the chains are slow getting moved. And i don't think it makes things more exciting than they already are at the end of the game. Watching a team work down the field with no TO's, using the sideline, is pretty exciting, and the rule as it is produces many exciting finishes.

For the most part the NFL has done a good job keeping the length of the game in check. Now college football is another story.

 

As to the question, to me it shouldn't be any other way. In other words, two feet inbounds.

For the most part the NFL has done a good job keeping the length of the game in check. Now college football is another story.

 

As to the question, to me it shouldn't be any other way. In other words, two feet inbounds.

 

Possibly in college but even there the replay capabilities vary greatly depending on the game.

 

I would never be in favor of two feet at the high school level. The refs at that level are not equipped to handle such calls and it would lead to more controversy.

See the ending of the Cleveland vs Jacksonville game today where the Jacksonville receiver was ruled to have two feet inbounds and possession in the endzone with 40 seconds left.

The rule is in place because professionals should be more challenged than college players. They should be more talented.

The rule is in place because professionals should be more challenged than college players. They should be more talented.

 

I agree but the problem I have with it is that the NFL complicates the rule with the "possession to the ground without the ball moving" silliness. The Jax receiver caught the ball.......but it was moving......so is it two feet after the ball stops moving???? If so, the refs and the replay official blew the call and cost Cleveland the game. If not, then how can you count the feet as being inbounds if the catch has not been completed yet?