Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "jargomcfargo" wrote:
    "Vikefanman2000" wrote:
    I like the rule change on forceouts!
    Would have been nice in Arizona a few years ago!
    Will there be a few plays near the sidelines where we miss out on a reception....but I love the idea of some explosive hits by CB's and Safety's trying to drive receivers out of bounds instead of all the arm tackles these days.


    We NEED more of these types of hits!



    As far as the facemask penalty being removed....I hope it doesnt turn into a new blocking technique....as I understand it now....as no grab, no foul.
    Isn't there some sort of rule about "hands to the face"???
    If so, wouldnt the same rule be in effect.....just calling it by a different name?
    The only controversy I can see with the force out is a db getting under a receiver when he goes up and carrying him 5yds. out of bounds. That will now be an incompletion.
    Just incorporate a rule from the NBA.....consider that a TRAVELING FOUL if he takes more then 2 steps without dribbling the receiver!
    ;D
    I'd much rather see the Packers miss the playoffs because of their talent then because of their injuries.

  2. #22
    Prophet's Avatar
    Prophet is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    17,388

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "jargomcfargo" wrote:
    "Vikefanman2000" wrote:
    I like the rule change on forceouts!
    Would have been nice in Arizona a few years ago!
    Will there be a few plays near the sidelines where we miss out on a reception....but I love the idea of some explosive hits by CB's and Safety's trying to drive receivers out of bounds instead of all the arm tackles these days.


    We NEED more of these types of hits!



    As far as the facemask penalty being removed....I hope it doesnt turn into a new blocking technique....as I understand it now....as no grab, no foul.
    Isn't there some sort of rule about "hands to the face"???
    If so, wouldnt the same rule be in effect.....just calling it by a different name?
    The only controversy I can see with the force out is a db getting under a receiver when he goes up and carrying him 5yds. out of bounds. That will now be an incompletion.
    That was a beautiful hit.
    Can't stand Meshawn.

    Good pt jargo, I wonder if they have some stuff in fine print to address that issue.
    Would be funny to see someone carry a WR from midfield and body slam him out of bounds.
    Incomplete.
    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  3. #23
    jargomcfargo's Avatar
    jargomcfargo is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,776

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "PacNWVike" wrote:
    Hmmm...
    You mean tackle while airborne and carry out of bounds?
    Wonder how many steps the refs will allow?
    Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Hope they thought about that possibility.
    “What takes a quarterback to the next level is not arm strength or mobility or any of that stuff. It’s the ability to play on critical downs. Manage third downs, or red zones or four-minute or two-minute situations"
    Dilfer

  4. #24
    PacNWVike's Avatar
    PacNWVike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Richland, WA
    Posts
    2,270

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "Prophet" wrote:
    "jargomcfargo" wrote:
    "Vikefanman2000" wrote:
    I like the rule change on forceouts!
    Would have been nice in Arizona a few years ago!
    Will there be a few plays near the sidelines where we miss out on a reception....but I love the idea of some explosive hits by CB's and Safety's trying to drive receivers out of bounds instead of all the arm tackles these days.


    We NEED more of these types of hits!



    As far as the facemask penalty being removed....I hope it doesnt turn into a new blocking technique....as I understand it now....as no grab, no foul.
    Isn't there some sort of rule about "hands to the face"???
    If so, wouldnt the same rule be in effect.....just calling it by a different name?
    The only controversy I can see with the force out is a db getting under a receiver when he goes up and carrying him 5yds. out of bounds. That will now be an incompletion.
    That was a beautiful hit.
    Can't stand Meshawn.

    Good pt jargo, I wonder if they have some stuff in fine print to address that issue.
    Would be funny to see someone carry a WR from midfield and body slam him out of bounds.
    Incomplete.
    Would add a whole new dimension to the game!
    WWF, here we come!
    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    Edmund Burke

  5. #25
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,776
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    not to mention it would be near impossible to catch a reciever running full tilt, stop him from hitting the ground and carry him out of bounds.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    not to mention it would be near impossible to catch a reciever running full tilt, stop him from hitting the ground and carry him out of bounds.

    Can the defender catch the receiver and run him back for a score??
    I would love to see PHAT PAT spike a receiver in the endzone!
    I'd much rather see the Packers miss the playoffs because of their talent then because of their injuries.

  7. #27
    jargomcfargo's Avatar
    jargomcfargo is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    4,776

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "Vikefanman2000" wrote:
    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    not to mention it would be near impossible to catch a reciever running full tilt, stop him from hitting the ground and carry him out of bounds.

    Can the defender catch the receiver and run him back for a score??
    I would love to see PHAT PAT spike a receiver in the endzone!
    As long as he doesn't grab him by the facemask.!
    “What takes a quarterback to the next level is not arm strength or mobility or any of that stuff. It’s the ability to play on critical downs. Manage third downs, or red zones or four-minute or two-minute situations"
    Dilfer

  8. #28
    happy camper's Avatar
    happy camper is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,445

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    In the force out rule (if I understand it correctly), you're asking the ref to determine A) if there was a force out and B) if the receiver would have come down in bounds if there had been no force out.

    The referees judgment is apart of the game.

    But asking the ref to decide whether or not a receiver would have or would not have come down in bounds if there were no contact is just asking too much, IMO.
    I just copied and pasted my thoughts from the last force-out rule thread.
    "There is good and there is evil. And evil must be punished. Even in the face of Armageddon I will not compromise."

  9. #29
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "Vikefanman2000" wrote:
    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    not to mention it would be near impossible to catch a reciever running full tilt, stop him from hitting the ground and carry him out of bounds.

    Can the defender catch the receiver and run him back for a score??
    I would love to see PHAT PAT spike a receiver in the endzone!
    Nope - forward-progress and 15 yards for Unsportsmanlike Conduct.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,072

    Re: Force out rule removed!

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Vikefanman2000" wrote:
    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    not to mention it would be near impossible to catch a reciever running full tilt, stop him from hitting the ground and carry him out of bounds.

    Can the defender catch the receiver and run him back for a score??
    I would love to see PHAT PAT spike a receiver in the endzone!
    Nope - forward-progress and 15 yards for Unsportsmanlike Conduct.

    =Z=

    Oh....I know....
    but that might be worth a one time penalty to watch the spike!
    I'd much rather see the Packers miss the playoffs because of their talent then because of their injuries.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Galbladder removed?
    By Garland Greene in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 10:18 AM
  2. Vikings receivers adjust to league's new force-out rule
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 06-01-2008, 11:53 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-09-2008, 08:20 PM
  4. Elimination of the force out rule!
    By marstc09 in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 03-31-2008, 07:09 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-05-2007, 08:00 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •