When the Offense Fumbles the Ball Out of the Opposing End Zone the Result Should Be....

[iinii]

30 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

The current rule has been part of football since the 1920's.

Right, I was talking about the really good OLD days 

11 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

So you want to award the offense six points for fumbling the ball? Out of bounds you get the ball at the spot so...

No. I didn’t say they get a touchdown, they should just get the ball at the spot they lost it or at the old PAT spot. 

[Cripple Creek]

7 hours ago, iinii said:

Right, I was talking about the really good OLD days 

No. I didn’t say they get a touchdown, they should just get the ball at the spot they lost it or at the old PAT spot. 

Ah, the spot they lost it, but that's not the same as where the ball went out of bounds.  Irregardless, that's a bad idea. I could live with giving the offense the ball at the 20 or 25 with the down based on the prior line of scrimmage.  If it was 3rd and goal from the 3 it's now fourth and goal from the 20 or 25.  If it was 2nd and 10 from the 50 it's now first and ten from the new spot.

[Doc Brown]

The problem with moving it to the 25 yard line and a loss of down is what do you do if we have a Leon Lett/Don Beebe situation where the defender fumbles it in the end zone on a turnover.  Does the offense get the ball at the 25 yard line?  Will it be 1st and 10 or 2nd and 10?  Let the rule be.

 

By the way, if Bryce Brown doesn't fumble it into the end zone against the Chiefs and this rule wasn't in place and we had it at the one yard line we pry beat the Cheifs.  Thus, setting up a chain of events that allows us to make the playoffs that year and Doug Marrone probably remaining our coach with Jim Schwartz as DC.  I always think of that one play as the most pivotal moment in the Bills history over the last five years.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Doc Brown

[NoSaint]

8 hours ago, iinii said:

So we should go back to the good old days when an incomplete pass in the end zone resulted in a turnover? High risk/high reward!

 

Suoer smarmy...

 

The offense is advancing the ball, they pushed it into the end zone out of control, and in turn have the responsibility to regain possession- not that crazy. If they do they get the highest prize in the game. If they don’t, the other team successfully defended the goal line. It’s  not like any of that is super crazy. 

 

Given things like the play immediately stopping as soon as a controlled ball touches the goal line I think this helps balance things out. If you are going to stretch the ball out with reduced risk of fumble (plays dead as soon as it crosses) then I’m ok giving the defense some help and putting the impetus on the offense to recover after reckless play there.

[Rochesterfan]

7 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Suoer smarmy...

 

The offense is advancing the ball, they pushed it into the end zone out of control, and in turn have the responsibility to regain possession- not that crazy. If they do they get the highest prize in the game. If they don’t, the other team successfully defended the goal line. It’s  not like any of that is super crazy. 

 

Given things like the play immediately stopping as soon as a controlled ball touches the goal line I think this helps balance things out. If you are going to stretch the ball out with reduced risk of fumble (plays dead as soon as it crosses) then I’m ok giving the defense some help and putting the impetus on the offense to recover after reckless play there.

 

Agreed - if they are going to make that change then I think you have to make a bunch of other changes around the goal line.  People need to be down in the end zone rather than just break the plain.  There are several times guys just barely break the plain and are not down and then fumble because they carelessly reach out the ball.  

 

The end end zone has always had different rules for many things than the middle of the field and the turnover aspect of OOB plays is one of them.  

[frostbitmic]

Don't fumble the ball out of the end zone.

 

Why should a team fumbling the ball get rewarded with getting the ball back ?

[iinii]

4 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

Ah, the spot they lost it, but that's not the same as where the ball went out of bounds.  Irregardless, that's a bad idea. I could live with giving the offense the ball at the 20 or 25 with the down based on the prior line of scrimmage.  If it was 3rd and goal from the 3 it's now fourth and goal from the 20 or 25.  If it was 2nd and 10 from the 50 it's now first and ten from the new spot.

Your opinion doesn’t make mine bad, which is a common theme in this board. Posters don’t seem to understand that this is a message board full of ideas. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it wrong. 

31 minutes ago, frostbitmic said:

Don't fumble the ball out of the end zone.

 

Why should a team fumbling the ball get rewarded with getting the ball back ?

Why should the team that may have had nothing to do with the fumble and never had possession get rewarded with the ball?

[iinii]

4 hours ago, NoSaint said:

 

Suoer smarmy...

 

The offense is advancing the ball, they pushed it into the end zone out of control, and in turn have the responsibility to regain possession- not that crazy. If they do they get the highest prize in the game. If they don’t, the other team successfully defended the goal line. It’s  not like any of that is super crazy. 

 

Given things like the play immediately stopping as soon as a controlled ball touches the goal line I think this helps balance things out. If you are going to stretch the ball out with reduced risk of fumble (plays dead as soon as it crosses) then I’m ok giving the defense some help and putting the impetus on the offense to recover after reckless play there.

Remember when Antoine Smith fumbled going into the house against the Jets? He wasn’t reaching out with the ball in a risky way or being reckless. 

And BTW grow up. Smarmy? Really? It was a rule but it was changed like this one should be. 

[NoSaint]

11 minutes ago, iinii said:

Remember when Antoine Smith fumbled going into the house against the Jets? He wasn’t reaching out with the ball in a risky way or being reckless. 

And BTW grow up. Smarmy? Really? It was a rule but it was changed like this one should be. 

 

Certainly not smarmy ?

[Chicken Boo]

If you fumble the ball out of the endzone, you deserve to lose possession! 

 

That's an egregious error that warrants harsh punishment.

[frostbitmic]

6 hours ago, iinii said:

Your opinion doesn’t make mine bad, which is a common theme in this board. Posters don’t seem to understand that this is a message board full of ideas. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it wrong. 

Why should the team that may have had nothing to do with the fumble and never had possession get rewarded with the ball?

Because the offense wasn't good enough to get the ball across the goal line or kick it through the goal posts.... Why should they get it back after failing ?

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

6 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:

That's an egregious error that warrants harsh punishment.

Worf would say “Find him and kill him!”

 

You’re not only a chicken... you’re a Klingon chicken!

[Cripple Creek]

8 hours ago, iinii said:

Your opinion doesn’t make mine bad, which is a common theme in this board. Posters don’t seem to understand that this is a message board full of ideas. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it wrong. 

 

I didn't call your opinion bad or anything close. Posters don't seem to understand that this is a message board full of ideas. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make your idea wrong.