From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I like the rule. I think you need to be careful with making it too easy on the offense.
Take a QB entering the out of bounds. He is untouchable. Both the QB and Defensive player knows this and therefore the QB can do some extra yardage "risk free"
If you apply the "no risk" to the offensive near the EZ, they will always stretch out. Why not? You get to keep the ball if it goes out of bounds or you get to score if a fleck of leather crosses the plane. I like this rule. Provide some risk. Make the offense WANT to keep that ball. Always protect the ball.
I’ve seen it enough times, i won’t be convinced otherwise. It’s an awful rule, i hate it.
I agree, the EZ should not give the defense possession simply because the fumble went through the EZ out of bounds, the same rule in play field should be the same in that circumstance to, it is a dumb rule, last player to have possession should be held up then as well.
on that particular play I thought Hardeman was down before ever losing possession, and since the rules state the ground can't cause a fumble, it should have been Chiefs ball on the spot his knee touched, Chiefs imho where screwed by the refs.
and why should it go back to the offense? because they possessed it last? BFD. The most important job they have is not to lose it, they just did. Why just get it back? you committed a mortal sin on offense. I'd be fine if they lost every fumble. Maintain possession or you'll no longer have possession. But they'll never do that. But change the rule that's been here since the dawn of football, you lose a ball in the enemy's house? yeah, you're not getting it back.
and why should it go back to the offense? because they possessed it last? BFD. The most important job they have is not to lose it, they just did. Why just get it back? you committed a mortal sin on offense. I'd be fine if they lost every fumble. Maintain possession or you'll no longer have possession. But they'll never do that. But change the rule that's been here since the dawn of football, you lose a ball in the enemy's house? yeah, you're not getting it back.
Well because they last had possession
and here we have a vote for defensive football the guy with the ball has to not only protect the ball, but also himself against people that will do anything to strip it, aint easy, why penalize him, specially when no one from the other team ever had possession of the ball? this is one convo where I have to disagree with ya MS
For those that don't like the rule: Think of the football as a big wad of cash. If I throw that wad of cash over the US-Mexico border, should I expect to get it back?
“We didn’t lose the game; we just ran out of time.”
- Vince Lombardi
For those that don't like the rule: Think of the football as a big wad of cash. If I throw that wad of cash over the US-Mexico border, should I expect to get it back?
well thats different, you willingly gave up possession of that money so you would be labeled a Indian giver, and the natives would possibly scalp you, don't mess with the Indians
and why should it go back to the offense? because they possessed it last? BFD. The most important job they have is not to lose it, they just did. Why just get it back? you committed a mortal sin on offense. I'd be fine if they lost every fumble. Maintain possession or you'll no longer have possession. But they'll never do that. But change the rule that's been here since the dawn of football, you lose a ball in the enemy's house? yeah, you're not getting it back.
Well because they last had possession
and here we have a vote for defensive football the guy with the ball has to not only protect the ball, but also himself against people that will do anything to strip it, aint easy, why penalize him, specially when no one from the other team ever had possession of the ball? this is one convo where I have to disagree with ya MS
But they don’t lose it in neutral territory, they lost it in the enemies house.
It's consistent. A fumble out of your own end zone is 2 points to the opponent and you kicking to them. A fumble out of the opponents end zone is a touchback for the opponent.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
and why should it go back to the offense? because they possessed it last? BFD. The most important job they have is not to lose it, they just did. Why just get it back? you committed a mortal sin on offense. I'd be fine if they lost every fumble. Maintain possession or you'll no longer have possession. But they'll never do that. But change the rule that's been here since the dawn of football, you lose a ball in the enemy's house? yeah, you're not getting it back.
Well because they last had possession
and here we have a vote for defensive football the guy with the ball has to not only protect the ball, but also himself against people that will do anything to strip it, aint easy, why penalize him, specially when no one from the other team ever had possession of the ball? this is one convo where I have to disagree with ya MS
But they don’t lose it in neutral territory, they lost it in the enemies house.
actually what we are discussing happened prior to the enemy's house, the ball rolling through the enemy's house and then out of bounds is still possession lost and out of bounds, same as in the field of play, to me it's just a tit for tat rule by the nfl attempting parody, it's just another way to keep offenses in check.
Did any of you guys see that Bills fan after the game sobbing? It sucks to lose as we know all too well but to cry like that after a football game? This poor guy needs a hobby...
Did any of you guys see that Bills fan after the game sobbing? It sucks to lose as we know all too well but to cry like that after a football game? This poor guy needs a hobby...
I couldn't watch/consume anything football until April after the 2014 loss in Seattle...
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Well because they last had possession
and here we have a vote for defensive football the guy with the ball has to not only protect the ball, but also himself against people that will do anything to strip it, aint easy, why penalize him, specially when no one from the other team ever had possession of the ball? this is one convo where I have to disagree with ya MS
But they don’t lose it in neutral territory, they lost it in the enemies house.
actually what we are discussing happened prior to the enemy's house, the ball rolling through the enemy's house and then out of bounds is still possession lost and out of bounds, same as in the field of play, to me it's just a tit for tat rule by the nfl attempting parody, it's just another way to keep offenses in check.
but this is JMO
It's a football rule. It's been around I believe since the beginning of the game. I don't think there was thoughts of "parody" when it was created.
All football leagues follow it for the exception fo the USFL/XLF changed the rule in its league in 2023.
It is not a new rule. It also not unique to the NFL.
Did any of you guys see that Bills fan after the game sobbing? It sucks to lose as we know all too well but to cry like that after a football game? This poor guy needs a hobby...
Did any of you guys see that Bills fan after the game sobbing? It sucks to lose as we know all too well but to cry like that after a football game? This poor guy needs a hobby...
I couldn't watch/consume anything football until April after the 2014 loss in Seattle...
Did any of you guys see that Bills fan after the game sobbing? It sucks to lose as we know all too well but to cry like that after a football game? This poor guy needs a hobby...
I couldn't watch/consume anything football until April after the 2014 loss in Seattle...
I hear ya, but to cry?
Good thing you didn't hang out with me in January 2021 and January 2022.
But they don’t lose it in neutral territory, they lost it in the enemies house.
actually what we are discussing happened prior to the enemy's house, the ball rolling through the enemy's house and then out of bounds is still possession lost and out of bounds, same as in the field of play, to me it's just a tit for tat rule by the nfl attempting parody, it's just another way to keep offenses in check.
but this is JMO
It's a football rule. It's been around I believe since the beginning of the game. I don't think there was thoughts of "parody" when it was created.
All football leagues follow it for the exception fo the USFL/XLF changed the rule in its league in 2023.
It is not a new rule. It also not unique to the NFL.
when did it become the rule, I seriously see NO reason for it other then to limit the offense, which the officials where able to do by not calling Hardeman down prior to the fumble, if they had we wouldn't even be discussing this.
actually what we are discussing happened prior to the enemy's house, the ball rolling through the enemy's house and then out of bounds is still possession lost and out of bounds, same as in the field of play, to me it's just a tit for tat rule by the nfl attempting parody, it's just another way to keep offenses in check.
but this is JMO
It's a football rule. It's been around I believe since the beginning of the game. I don't think there was thoughts of "parody" when it was created.
All football leagues follow it for the exception fo the USFL/XLF changed the rule in its league in 2023.
It is not a new rule. It also not unique to the NFL.
when did it become the rule, I seriously see NO reason for it other then to limit the offense, which the officials where able to do by not calling Hardeman down prior to the fumble, if they had we wouldn't even be discussing this.
It's been a rule since about the inception of the game. The reason for it is because it is consistent all the way around, a ball out of the end zone without possession is a touchback. Happens on kickoffs, punts, and fumbles. Even a fumble out of your own end zone results in a change of possession.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
The 2014 NFCCG was literally traumatic. It took months for me to stop having flashbacks to the terrible plays we inflicted on ourselves. The onside kick fail, the 2pt conversion, sliding on that one INT... all those bad plays would just pop into my head over and over. It was brutal.
I did feel a little better after seeing Richard Sherman's soul get stolen when Russell Wilson threw that INT to lose the game. F that team.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
the guy with the ball has to not only protect the ball, but also himself against people that will do anything to strip it, aint easy, why penalize him, specially when no one from the other team ever had possession of the ball? this is one convo where I have to disagree with ya MS 
so you would be labeled a Indian giver, and the natives would possibly scalp you, don't mess with the Indians 
