PDA

View Full Version : The coverage rules


whoman69
12-09-2004, 11:24 PM
The "new" coverage rules are making it increasingly impossible to cover receivers. I heard Ron Jaworski make a good point today. He stated that if this rule is allowed to run for 5 more years then every major passing record will be obliterated. I live an aerial game as much as the next person, but this isn't ballroom dancing. The referees have gone from not calling the rule as called, to now calling any sort of contact down the field whether it impedes the receiver or no. Teams may as well start consitently seven man blitzing because there's no way to adequately cover a receiver under the current rules. 20some years ago Jack Lambert stated that QBs should be forced to wear pink tutus on the field. I think that standard now belongs to receivers. I certainly don't want to go back to the 3 yards and a cloud of dust bump and cover days of the 70s, but there has got to be some physicality invovled in the game.

theultimatekcchiefsfan
12-10-2004, 12:42 AM
This is why in my mind no matter how many touchdowns Manning throws, they should have an asteric beside them. His receivers have it alot easier to get deep and open than Marinos who were always bumped.

This rule has to go. The defenders have way to much disadvantage now.

tk13
12-10-2004, 12:48 AM
What I really want to see is what happens in the playoffs and how they call it... and if it allows a more "offensive minded" team to actually get to the Super Bowl.

stevieray
12-10-2004, 12:51 AM
I'm curious which teams have had this called in their favor the most, and which teams this has been called against the most.

Rausch
12-10-2004, 12:53 AM
While I think it has squat to do with why our team sucks arse, the new rules (or enforcement of them) suck just as much.

Football is a physical game, so let's let it be one....

Logical
12-10-2004, 01:57 AM
I'm curious which teams have had this called in their favor the most, and which teams this has been called against the most.

I have a feeling that our CBs and Safeties are getting burned so bad that it is not called as much against us as those teams with good DBs.

Taco John
12-10-2004, 02:23 AM
The new rules suck...

elvomito
12-10-2004, 02:51 AM
i think the rulemakers believe defense wins championships anyway, so it really doesn't matter. let the season be intriguing with high offense, because in the end, defense will prevail anyway.

but the refs still are too much of a factor in games. period. so these rules suck.

Miles
12-10-2004, 02:56 AM
The new rules are definitly puting a premium on a good pass rush. If you cant cover the WR's the best you can do is pressure the QB.

I dont necessarily hate the new rule it but i wish it were enforced more consistantly. It tends to be more skewed twards better teams. For instance a few weeks ago when i was watching an ARZ game I noticed that Boldin was drawing tons of contact but nothinig was being called.

philfree
12-10-2004, 03:43 AM
There are no new rules but rather a supposed new enforcement fo the rules that already existed. The calls are inconsistant and IMO the push for tighter calls is BS and hasn't changed a thing. The Patriots got away with mugging the Indy and Carolina recievers last year so the focus was suppose to be increased. When Gonzo got mugged on Monday Night there was no flag................I haven't really noticed a difference in the PI calls this year. Some teams get the calls and some teams don't and that's the way it's been forever.

PhilFree :arrow:

Ultra Peanut
12-10-2004, 04:23 AM
They would be better if they called the "new" rules consistently.

Gaz
12-10-2004, 07:56 AM
The new rules are definitly puting a premium on a good pass rush. If you cant cover the WR's the best you can do is pressure the QB...

Ka-CHING!

xoxo~
Gaz
Considers a CRUSHED QB the only viable pass Defense in the modern NFL.