CFB Rules Changes

[33jacket]

We would use the first one no doubt imo

The second who cares. That rule really hurts heavy screen pass teams more than anything. And that isnt us.

 

[collegeballfan]

My 2 cents on this. My understanding it is for illegal receivers down field, not illegal blockers. The 5 interior linemen cannot go down field on a pass play as they are not eligible receivers. Now 3 yards and they are talking about reducing to 1 yard. Why is beyond my knowledge of the game. Are some teams using linemen to set screens?

 

[TomOReilly]

There are plenty of times I have seen what looks like JT's pitch is forward as the A-back flies to the ball. This would happen late in the progression in the TO as JT holds onto the ball after LOS. If this happens LOS +1 yd now, this would be considered a forward pass and we would be flagged.

 

[TomOReilly]

Maybe, I am wrong because as soon as crosses the LOS, a forward lateral is flagged. My bad!

 

[CoolHandluq]

yeah, I suspect @CoolHandluq had blocking by a non-receiver in mind

yeah, I suspect @CoolHandluq had blocking by a non-receiver in mind

Sorry my message was poorly worded. That is exactly what I was trying to convey. Oregon/Auburn type offense have been getting away with down field blocking for quite some time. My take is this hurts them more than us. But the bigger point was that refs dont enforce the rule now at 3 not expecting much better at 1. I saw plays where Oregon had offensive lineman 5yds past the line of scrimmage with no flags (and no this was not on screen plays but on deep bombs)

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Option one - they can't even keep the refs mike working, how they going to keep the helmet mike working? Time out for equipment failure?

Option two - leave the blocking rules alone.

Side note - anyone think Auburn was having their signals stolen last year? Last four games?

 

[IronJacket7]

If it ain't broke...

 

[danny daniel]

If JT laterals just a tad forward to our A-Back after crossing the LOS +1 yd, we will be called for illegal blockers down field. Is that right?

No. Lateral by definition is NOT FORWARD. That is a pass. If JT is past the LOS that is an illegal forward pass. The penalty we are discussing is ineligible receivers downfield (one yard or more) before the ball is thrown. Has nothing to do with blocking.

 

[danny daniel]

Maybe, I am wrong because as soon as crosses the LOS, a forward lateral is flagged. My bad!

No such thing as a forward lateral. If its lateral or backward it is a lateral. If it is forward it is a pass.

 

[UgaBlows]

i like the idea of CPJ being able to communicate directly with the QB, not just sending in a play but really being able to talk to him and give him more beta

 

[Animal02]

No. Lateral by definition is NOT FORWARD. That is a pass. If JT is past the LOS that is an illegal forward pass. The penalty we are discussing is ineligible receivers downfield (one yard or more) before the ball is thrown. Has nothing to do with blocking.

No such thing as a forward lateral. If its lateral or backward it is a lateral. If it is forward it is a pass.

I could see certain instances where Tech may get bit by this new rule if JT hold late and pitches forward right before he crosses the LOS.....it is a legal forward pass and we have linemen more than 1 yard downfield

 

[danny daniel]

I could see certain instances where Tech may get bit by this new rule if JT hold late and pitches forward right before he crosses the LOS.....it is a legal forward pass and we have linemen more than 1 yard downfield

Correct! This is very likely as we send linemen after the LBs on running plays. That's why we want tackles and a center with good mobility. And I believe JT pitched a couple or so forward this past season.

 

[Animal02]

Correct! This is very likely as we send linemen after the LBs on running plays. That's why we want tackles and a center with good mobility. And I believe JT pitched a couple or so forward this past season.

And pitching it forward in some cares is a good choice......if they drop the ball, it is an incomplete instead of a fumble.

 

[Eastman]

If there is an exception for forward passes that are completed behind the line of scrimmage, I wouldn't see much of a problem. However if for example Burden is attacking a linebacker a few yards downfield and JT pitches forward (a pass) to an a-back who is still behind the line of scrimmage, we would be susceptible to a penalty. That seems ridiculous.

 

[CoolHandluq]

Clarity...this is about illegal receivers downfield (typically linemen but could be a covered receiver/aback). The rule does not apply to passes or laterals behind the line of scrimmage, so the majority of our offense is unaffected. The rule is really designed to counter the package option plays someone linked to earlier in this thread (Oregon/Auburn Spread option plays with a built in pass option).

 

[zhavenor]

No such thing as a forward lateral. If its lateral or backward it is a lateral. If it is forward it is a pass.

Technically there is no such thing as a lateral in the rule book. There is a forward pass and a backward pass. No such thing as a lateral by definition.

 

[zhavenor]

The big concern for me is how this will affect play action passes. It doesn't take much for an o-lineman to get a yard down field trying to make it look like a run.

 

[GTpdm]

seems to work pretty well in the NFL

Particularly for Belicheck--I have to presume New England has RF scanners on their sidelines...

 

[cyptomcat]

Particularly for Belicheck--I have to presume New England has RF scanners on their sidelines...

It's all encrypted, good luck with that.

 

[dubjacket]

This will stop the teams who use the run/pass option for five or six straight plays. Teams like Clemson, ole Miss, Auburn do this and every time the ball goes to a different player. Most of the time refs don't call this until a guy is 5-7 yards down field even though rule says 3 yards. This will make refs enforce by 3 yards down field. Won't affect us b/c aback blocks are mostly outside the tackle box and they are eligible receivers!