Possible NFL rule changes for 17/18

[DeadlySplitter]

So what? If you can't stop the other team from putting together a 10 minute drive, you deserve to lose. This isn't a problem.

perhaps, but the goal is both teams get to possess the ball and a legitimate drive as long as the defense holds at all at first.

Personally I feel OT should be like basketball, get x amount of minutes and let whatever scoring that happens occur until time runs out again, and keep going to multiple OTs if necessary.

 

[Harry Hooper]

You're welcome to quibble with my choice of words, as 'national outcry' is too strong, but it was most certainly a talking point in sports media in the weeks following the SB. Was it Deflategate or Spygate? No and I don't think that was implied, or at least it wasn't intended.

But it certainly was a hot button issue, sparking debate enough for The Economist to weigh in (http://www.economist.com/blogs/gametheory/2017/02/overtime-rules-american-football) and a lot of media outlets chiming in via columns and TV content on the subject for weeks. We had a thread on it here even (http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/overtime-rules.17993/).

(I'm also not implying the rule change is aimed at the Pats. As someone else stated, I think it's about TV schedules and the faux air of caring about player health, but YMMV.)

There was also Meryl Streep denouncing the Falcons not getting a possession in OT.

 

[DJnVa]

Well, we're suddenly talking about changing the rule, right?

Not in any way that would have helped the Falcons, so screw them.

 

[Mooch]

I don't think I like that cut-down change. From both the players and coaches perspectives, step-wise cut-downs allow more flexibility to be picked up and tried out by another team. I wonder what the reasoning is.

Here's a list of every player cut last year at the 75 man roster mark: http://www.sbnation.com/2016/8/27/12642702/tracking-2016-nfl-roster-cuts-75-man-deadline

Only 4 guys were claimed by other teams. Frankly, I think that having extra bodies in camp for as long as possible gives them depth at every position in case of last minute injuries in training camp. For a team like the Patriots, holding on to guys as long as possible is preferable to the extremely slight chance that they will find a diamond in the rough from another team's initial cutdown phase. Fact is, those first group of cuts are simply not roster-worthy players.

 

[dbn]

Here's a list of every player cut last year at the 75 man roster mark: http://www.sbnation.com/2016/8/27/12642702/tracking-2016-nfl-roster-cuts-75-man-deadline

Only 4 guys were claimed by other teams. Frankly, I think that having extra bodies in camp for as long as possible gives them depth at every position in case of last minute injuries in training camp. For a team like the Patriots, holding on to guys as long as possible is preferable to the extremely slight chance that they will find a diamond in the rough from another team's initial cutdown phase. Fact is, those first group of cuts are simply not roster-worthy players.

Thanks for looking that up. Interesting, but 4/15 isn't nothing. I see your point, though.

 

[MalzoneExpress]

Thanks for looking that up. Interesting, but 4/15 isn't nothing. I see your point, though.

The 4 is for all teams, so the number is 4/(15x30). However, the article does not list 15 for each team. I don't know what to make of that.

 

[Mooch]

The 4 is for all teams, so the number is 4/(15x30). However, the article does not list 15 for each team. I don't know what to make of that.

Simple answer on this one: Some teams release players earlier than the deadline - That link only lists the players who were cut on that particular day.

 

[dbn]

The 4 is for all teams, so the number is 4/(15x30). However, the article does not list 15 for each team. I don't know what to make of that.

Oops. Never mind.

 

[joe dokes]

Here's a list of every player cut last year at the 75 man roster mark: http://www.sbnation.com/2016/8/27/12642702/tracking-2016-nfl-roster-cuts-75-man-deadline

Only 4 guys were claimed by other teams. Frankly, I think that having extra bodies in camp for as long as possible gives them depth at every position in case of last minute injuries in training camp. For a team like the Patriots, holding on to guys as long as possible is preferable to the extremely slight chance that they will find a diamond in the rough from another team's initial cutdown phase. Fact is, those first group of cuts are simply not roster-worthy players.

I also trust that the Patriots are better able to sift through the now-larger number of cuts than are other teams. I base that on nothing other than the fact that they are better at most things than most teams.