K-9 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I heard a few NFL folks from that era refer to it as the "Neil Smith rule" Haha, that too. Definitely a "Smith" rule of some kind. Lawrence Taylor was also good at it as were most dominant pass rushers. At any rate, they should go back to how it used to be and place the onus entirely on the set offense to maintain poise until the ball is snapped. Defense is at a disadvantage as it is. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I can't for the life of me figure out why they changed the rule in the first place. I linemen were taught to ignore movement by the defense. If they didn't it was a penalty. Now it's the exact opposite. At any movement they move and get a free 5 yards. Makes no sense to me. Why did the rule need fixing in the first place? Still & all...that was !@#$ing ridiculous yesterday. I don't like the new version of the rule either and agree it should be revisited or struck. As to 'Why?', as least in part, it goes all the way back to the NYSE, (New York Sack Exchange) IMO. Klecko would jump offsides 2-3 times a game and not stop til he smacked the QB to the ground in a free, cheap shot. By 'allowing' the OL to protect against getting their QB creamed, its' led to this horsecrap of any OL who's quick enough to respond to a DL jumping into the neutral zone, drawing a penalty against the Defense. Hope the rules committee re-visits this rule this off-season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I don't like the new version of the rule either and agree it should be revisited or struck. As to 'Why?', as least in part, it goes all the way back to the NYSE, (New York Sack Exchange) IMO. Klecko would jump offsides 2-3 times a game and not stop til he smacked the QB to the ground in a free, cheap shot. By 'allowing' the OL to protect against getting their QB creamed, its' led to this horsecrap of any OL who's quick enough to respond to a DL jumping into the neutral zone, drawing a penalty against the Defense. Hope the rules committee re-visits this rule this off-season. They instituted the "unabated to the QB" rule in order to mitigate that kind of offsides by the defense. And for good reason. I have no problem with that rule at all. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Haha, that too. Definitely a "Smith" rule of some kind. Lawrence Taylor was also good at it as were most dominant pass rushers. At any rate, they should go back to how it used to be and place the onus entirely on the set offense to maintain poise until the ball is snapped. Defense is at a disadvantage as it is. GO BILLS!!! I remember thinking for years that Neil Smith was getting away with a lot by constantly baiting the OLmen, so I was happy the rule was enacted in his name. I know that OLmen now take advantage of it, but I'm not sure there's a good solution. I'd hate to see a scenario where guys like Suh (just as an example) willingly take an encroachment penalty early in the game specifically to get a good shot on an unsuspecting center, so that later in the game he can bait him into a false start penalty. If you remember (and I'd wager that you do), Neil was famous for doing that. Ironically, it was future teammate Tom Nalen, who played center for Denver, that made the big stink about it that eventually got through to the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemac2001 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 There dline was moving sideways which kept making our oline jump Why is that not the same type of call Simulating a snap It was just annoying bc we had so many false starts and encroachments Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I remember thinking for years that Neil Smith was getting away with a lot by constantly baiting the OLmen, so I was happy the rule was enacted in his name. I know that OLmen now take advantage of it, but I'm not sure there's a good solution. I'd hate to see a scenario where guys like Suh (just as an example) willingly take an encroachment penalty early in the game specifically to get a good shot on an unsuspecting center, so that later in the game he can bait him into a false start penalty. If you remember (and I'd wager that you do), Neil was famous for doing that. Ironically, it was future teammate Tom Nalen, who played center for Denver, that made the big stink about it that eventually got through to the league. These are all good points to be sure. How about any unabated defensive player that makes contact incurs a 15 yard personal foul penalty and a warning that the next infraction results in an ejection and subsequent suspension? Seems to me that would take the steam out of a D player whose only intent is to get a good lick on an opposing player instead of attempting to get back on side. GO BILLS!!! There dline was moving sideways which kept making our oline jump Why is that not the same type of call Simulating a snap It was just annoying bc we had so many false starts and encroachments I get what you're saying, but it's not the same because there is no neutral zone violation. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Ruben Brown said the center draws the defense offsides just by squeezing the ball. The defense is taught to go on any movement . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 These are all good points to be sure. How about any unabated defensive player that makes contact incurs a 15 yard personal foul penalty and a warning that the next infraction results in an ejection and subsequent suspension? Seems to me that would take the steam out of a D player whose only intent is to get a good lick on an opposing player instead of attempting to get back on side. GO BILLS!!! I could get on board with that. - Neutral Zone Infraction penalty goes away - Offsides is still a 5-yard penalty - Encroachment is now a 15-yard PF penalty I like it...I honestly couldn't think of a happy medium, but that's good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Just let the entire Offense move prior to the snap without setting - you know - like the Texans do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Ruben Brown said the center draws the defense offsides just by squeezing the ball. The defense is taught to go on any movement . Ruben is right, of course. But the defense is taught to go on the movement of the ball, not just any movement. But centers have been flinching fingers since the offsides became a penalty and defensive linemen will continue to fall for it. It's really an art form, too. Some centers correlate the movement with a QBs hard count, too. It's like catnip to a DLman. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Yes but according to the rule then and now as soon as the O lineman moves that is considered "harm" so then a foul is called. Conversely if he gets back both then and now and no one moves no foul. Still no one has shown what has changed with respect to the rule. Sounds like what has been stated here is a team figured how to use the rule to their advantage and get five free yards. You have 15 people here telling you that the rule changed. Either believe it or don't...or better yet Thomas do the research yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 O-lineman are now coached to jump the moment the defender does. This does not allow the defender to get back. Also often it is not the lineman directly opposite the defender that reacts. This should not be a penalty any longer. It should just be a play stoppage and do-over. Yes the defender is in the wrong but by not allowing them to get back it is unfair. Should be no harm no foul. This would also take away any judgement by the referees. Interested in others thoughts. Why should the defense be allowed to get back when they jump offsides? Should the offense be allowed to get back when they false start causing the defense to jump? The easy solution is not to jump offsides and just watch the ball It's unfair, give me a break. This is football not the playground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 (edited) I don't get why people are arguing so much about this. Both sides, offense and defense, have been trying to bait the other side into a penalty since the beginning of football time. The offense tries to simulate a snap to draw the defense offsides. The defense tries to scare the offense into a false start. The rule may have been changed to allow for "safety" of the offense, but the purpose was to not penalize an offensive player if a defender illegally (ie, by entering the neutral zone) caused them to flinch. By flinching, the play is immediately ruled dead because of a false start. But if the defender illegally "induced" them to flinch, then it should be a penalty on the defense. Just bear in mind that it would have to be an illegal inducement; that is, the defender doing something potentially illegal (entering the neutral zone) to cause the false start. If he wasn't in the neutral zone, it's always called a false start on the offense. So all we're seeing now is a consequence of the "false start" rule and the "safety" rule together. Offensive coaches figured out that if a defender jumps the gun and enters the neutral zone, all you have to do is purposely false start, which immediately stops the play, and the ruling will always be a penalty on the defense for a neutral zone infraction and "inducing" them to false start through an illegal jump. I think it's more the consequence of the above than really a rule change per se. Edited December 15, 2015 by Rubes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tu-Toned Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 (edited) Why didn't Philly's D get called for the very same thing later in the game? Instead, it was a false start on us, geez, just be consistent! Edited December 15, 2015 by Tu-Toned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Why didn't Philly's D get called for the very same thing later in the game? Instead, it was a false start on us, geez, just be consistent! They didn't move into the neutral zone while moving side to side. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tu-Toned Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 They didn't move into the neutral zone while moving side to side. GO BILLS!!! It sure looked like they did to me, but generally I agree w most posters, if you can't havethe discipline to stay on sides, then they deserve what they get! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 What changed is, if a D-lineman 'jumped' that didn't give every offense lineman licenses to also jump and then point his finger at the DL to get a penalty. The old rule was that it was offsides if the defender made contact or was across the line when the football is snapped. Much better and easy to tell who was at fault without a 45 second ref huddle. Is there a difference between encroachment, offsides, and a neutral zone violation? or do refs just get to make up their own names for penalties? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 It sure looked like they did to me, but generally I agree w most posters, if you can't have the discipline to stay on sides, then they deserve what they get! I think if a dman can get back on sides before the snap, then it shouldn't be a penalty, like it used to be. And if an OLman can't maintain discipline and moves as a result of movement by the defense, then too bad. That's on him. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 The old rule was that it was offsides if the defender made contact or was across the line when the football is snapped. Much better and easy to tell who was at fault without a 45 second ref huddle. Is there a difference between encroachment, offsides, and a neutral zone violation? or do refs just get to make up their own names for penalties? So, how is it any different now? The same thing applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 So, how is it any different now? The same thing applies. Defenders can now be called offsides if they lean into the neutral zone without making contact before the football is snapped IF any offensive lineman stands up and points at him. How is it the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts