Nerfing the read option

[What a Tuel]

https://new.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-rule-changes-2023-no-0-jersey-is-back-personal-foul-penalties-clarified-one-date-for-roster-cutdowns/

 

Thought this would be bigger news since Allen holds the ball til the last second a ton. Did a search and didn't see a thread. 

 

"To make handing the football forward a penalty like an illegal forward pass, proposed by the Competition Committee

Rule change: This will penalize teams handing off the football forward on a read-option, for example, or any other running play a penalty. Handoffs will have to be made next to or behind the quarterback, not in front of. "

[WotAGuy]

If passed, will be henceforth known as the “Josh Allen Rule”. 

[WhoTom]

2 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

"To make handing the football forward a penalty like an illegal forward pass, proposed by the Competition Committee

Rule change: This will penalize teams handing off the football forward on a read-option, for example, or any other running play a penalty. Handoffs will have to be made next to or behind the quarterback, not in front of. "

 

Looks like a solution in need of a problem. Why is a "forward hand-off" a bad thing?

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

Is this confirmed?

 

If so I am seeing the ball becoming airborne instead of a handoff. That way it is a legal forward pass.

[CircleTheWagons99]

I thinks this rule change will hurt Mahomes and Hurts more then Allen.  I have seen Mahomes hold the ball and hand it of forward as implied by the rule.

[RangerDave]

I've often wondered:  Can only "eligible receivers" take a handoff, or can it be handed off to, say, a pulling guard as well?

[CircleTheWagons99]

Just now, RangerDave said:

I've often wondered:  Can only "eligible receivers" take a handoff, or can it be handed off to, say, a pulling guard as well?

that would be something to see.....

[CircleTheWagons99]

thinking about this more, if they do implement this rule, it will completely change they way running plays are executed.  Alot of running plays the RB gets the ball handed to them in front of the QB which would now be a penalty.  

[Punching Bag]

8 minutes ago, RangerDave said:

I've often wondered:  Can only "eligible receivers" take a handoff, or can it be handed off to, say, a pulling guard as well?

 

The 5 linemen set on line cannot take a ball or advance it in case of fumble or reflection.

[GustheDog33]

This play effectively negates the read option.  The whole point of the play is to read the end man on the LOS or EMOL.  In order to do this, the QB needs to hold the Mesh point with the back as long as possible to get a commitment from the EMOL.  If the Mesh can no longer be extended, the read option is no longer a read. 

[GoBills808]

17 minutes ago, WhoTom said:

 

Looks like a solution in need of a problem. Why is a "forward hand-off" a bad thing?

I think it's strange too

 

Ostensibly it penalizes the RPO more than read option...in read option the QB can read the DE facing sideways to complete a legal handoff but in RPO the conflict defender is usually in the middle of the field so while you're selling the mesh you're going to have a much harder time making the right read because you're facing sideways

 

so on the face of it I have no idea why the NFL would want to move away from rpo but this would be in service of that end imo

Edited June 9, 2023 by GoBills808

[Brand J]

As long as the QB isn’t past the LoS, how can anything constitute an illegal forward pass? 

[TBBills Fan]

5 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I think it's strange too

 

Ostensibly it penalizes the RPO more than read option...in read option the QB can read the DE facing sideways to complete a legal handoff but in RPO the conflict defender is usually in the middle of the field so while you're selling the mesh you're going to have a much harder time making the right read because you're facing sideways

 

so on the face of it I have no idea why the NFL would want to move away from rpo but this would be in service of that end imo

 

 

I agree, this seems odd.

[RangerDave]

8 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

The 5 linemen set on line cannot take a ball or advance it in case of fumble or reflection.

Dang, this negates my sneaky 4th and inches play where  the QB takes the snap from the center, then gives the ball right back to the center to move the ball forward a few inches.  🥴

[buffalo2218]

8 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:

As long as the QB isn’t past the LoS, how can anything constitute an illegal forward pass? 

This is exactly what I was thinking, this rule change makes very little sense. I don't think it'll effect Allen as much as it will Lamar Jackson

[transient]

42 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:

https://new.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-rule-changes-2023-no-0-jersey-is-back-personal-foul-penalties-clarified-one-date-for-roster-cutdowns/

 

Thought this would be bigger news since Allen holds the ball til the last second a ton. Did a search and didn't see a thread. 

 

"To make handing the football forward a penalty like an illegal forward pass, proposed by the Competition Committee

Rule change: This will penalize teams handing off the football forward on a read-option, for example, or any other running play a penalty. Handoffs will have to be made next to or behind the quarterback, not in front of. "

I guess it depends how they define “next to”. If Allen, for example, continues to hold on to the ball until the last second but advances with the RB, is it still considered “next to”?

 

 I don’t understand why the competition committee proposed this or why it passed. As someone said, seems like a stupid fix for a non-issue. 

Edited June 9, 2023 by transient

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

9 minutes ago, transient said:

I don’t understand why the competition committee proposed this or why it passed. 

[Allen2D̶i̶g̶g̶s̶TBD]

That rule change would also completely negate those forward push-pass jet sweeps (which I hope we'll do frequently with Deonte Harty)

Edited June 9, 2023 by Allen2Diggs

[JESSEFEFFER]

I think the zone read option is among the plays that carry the most risk of injury.  A misread by Josh leaves him 1 on1 vs. a much bigger body.  The play at 1:00 of this video might have caused me some heart pain.  So, good riddance is what I say.

 

Joey Bosa Bringing Josh Down.

 

 

[WhoTom]

1 hour ago, CircleTheWagons99 said:

thinking about this more, if they do implement this rule, it will completely change they way running plays are executed.  Alot of running plays the RB gets the ball handed to them in front of the QB which would now be a penalty.  

 

Yeah, and it makes determining the exact point of the hand-off a judgment call for the officials.  Another reason not to like it.

 

 

[Dr.Mantis_Toboggan]

“Rule change: A launch, which is a personal foul (15-yard penalty), is now if a player leaves one or both feet to make a tackle.”

 

Donte Whitner never would’ve seen a second contract in today’s league…

[transient]

18 minutes ago, Dr.Mantis_Toboggan said:

“Rule change: A launch, which is a personal foul (15-yard penalty), is now if a player leaves one or both feet to make a tackle.”

 

Donte Whitner never would’ve seen a second contract in today’s league…

Didn’t he change his name to lil’ Donte Hitler… kinda like Chad Ochocinco?

[without a drought]

How does this affect kickoffs and comp picks?

[WyoAZBillfan]

8 minutes ago, without a drought said:

How does this affect kickoffs and comp picks?

Gives the patriots a comp pick each time AND the ball at the opponents 25?🤷🏼‍♂️

Edited June 9, 2023 by WyoAZBillfan

[TBBills Fan]

13 minutes ago, transient said:

Didn’t he change his name to lil’ Donte Hitler… kinda like Chad Ochocinco?

 

 

It was Donte Whifner.....then McCargo when we would should have grabbed Ngata....so on and so on....

 

we were such a badly run operation them

 

THANK YOU MCBEANE!

Edited June 9, 2023 by TBBills Fan

[The Jokeman]

3 hours ago, WotAGuy said:

If passed, will be henceforth known as the “Josh Allen Rule”. 

I thought that was the name of the no first field goal wins in OT rule?

[PBF81]

3 hours ago, What a Tuel said:

https://new.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-rule-changes-2023-no-0-jersey-is-back-personal-foul-penalties-clarified-one-date-for-roster-cutdowns/

 

Thought this would be bigger news since Allen holds the ball til the last second a ton. Did a search and didn't see a thread. 

 

"To make handing the football forward a penalty like an illegal forward pass, proposed by the Competition Committee

Rule change: This will penalize teams handing off the football forward on a read-option, for example, or any other running play a penalty. Handoffs will have to be made next to or behind the quarterback, not in front of. "

 

So this would be illegal then?  

 

 

 

 

[MJS]

3 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

As long as the QB isn’t past the LoS, how can anything constitute an illegal forward pass? 

Yes. As long as the RB doesn't throw it forward afterward. One forward pass is allowed per play from behind the line of scrimmage. Whoever thought up this rule is an idiot.

[K-9]

Stupid.

[AuntieEm]

2 hours ago, Dr.Mantis_Toboggan said:

“Rule change: A launch, which is a personal foul (15-yard penalty), is now if a player leaves one or both feet to make a tackle.”

 

Donte Whitner never would’ve seen a second contract in today’s league…

 

If the above wording is correct with if player leaves one or both feet then I'd expect there could be video reviews needed on a large number of plays where there is a tackle as I'd guess that on every tackle the defender has both feet planted on ground maybe 75% of the time leaving 25%  of tackles where defender has at least one foot off ground in what they deem a launch position even if its just a small surge the player gives to make their tackle just a tad more punishing.  

 

And on short goal line plays its common that both offensive and defensive players leave their feet as the try to jump over the line to get the needed yards.  And if a cb is jumping for a contested pass and loses but then immediately grabs the receiver for a instantaneous tackle that would be a penalty by the above wording which would really make the game a total mess.

 

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by AuntieEm

[HardyBoy]

3 hours ago, Dr.Mantis_Toboggan said:

“Rule change: A launch, which is a personal foul (15-yard penalty), is now if a player leaves one or both feet to make a tackle.”

 

Donte Whitner never would’ve seen a second contract in today’s league…

 

Is that for real?! What if you dive to make a tackle? This sounds like it's a clarification of the existing rule of a targeting call or something... like targeting requires a launch and this is what a launch is now. 

[Buffalo716]

59 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

Is that for real?! What if you dive to make a tackle? This sounds like it's a clarification of the existing rule of a targeting call or something... like targeting requires a launch and this is what a launch is now. 

I agree… what about diving from behind to shoestring ? You leave your feet

[Thurman#1]

The wording of the rule will be key.

 

In two different articles, they worded it this way, "Proposed by Competition Committee: Make the penalty for illegally handing the ball forward consistent with other illegal acts, such as illegal forward passes."

 

 

In a 3rd, Jack Deignan has it the same way the OP's article does.

 

https://clutchpoints.com/nfl-news-rule-changes-2023-season

 

We'll need to see the exact wording.

 

It does seem to be a big change depending which wording is correct.

 

As things stand now, an "illegal forward handoff" is only called after a completed forward pass is followed by a handoff. In that case you can't hand forward.

The wording of the rule will be key.

 

In two different articles, they worded it this way, "Proposed by Competition Committee: Make the penalty for illegally handing the ball forward consistent with other illegal acts, such as illegal forward passes."

 

 

In a 3rd, Jack Deignan has it the same way the OP's article does.

 

https://clutchpoints.com/nfl-news-rule-changes-2023-season

 

We'll need to see the exact wording.

 

It does seem to be a big change depending which wording is correct.

 

As things stand now, an "illegal forward handoff" is only called after a completed forward pass is followed by a handoff. In that case you can't hand forward.

The wording of the rule will be key.

 

In two different articles, they worded it this way, "Proposed by Competition Committee: Make the penalty for illegally handing the ball forward consistent with other illegal acts, such as illegal forward passes."

 

 

In a 3rd, Jack Deignan has it the same way the OP's article does.

 

https://clutchpoints.com/nfl-news-rule-changes-2023-season

 

We'll need to see the exact wording.

 

It does seem to be a big change depending which wording is correct.

 

As things stand now, an "illegal forward handoff" is only called after a completed forward pass is followed by a handoff. In that case you can't hand forward.

[Thurman#1]

It'll depend on the wording. Perhaps the OP's article misstated slightly.

 

I see the rule elsewhere this way:

 

"By Competition Committee; to make the penalty for illegally handing the ball forward consistent with other illegal acts, such as illegal forward passes."

 

That's a whole different thing.

 

As of right now, "illegal forward handoff" refers NOT to handoffs made behind the LOS, but to handoffs made AFTER a completed forward pass.

 

The correct wording will be huge.

[What a Tuel]

5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

It'll depend on the wording. Perhaps the OP's article misstated slightly.

 

I see the rule elsewhere this way:

 

"By Competition Committee; to make the penalty for illegally handing the ball forward consistent with other illegal acts, such as illegal forward passes."

 

That's a whole different thing.

 

As of right now, "illegal forward handoff" refers NOT to handoffs made behind the LOS, but to handoffs made AFTER a completed forward pass.

 

The correct wording will be huge.

 

Yeah I see what you mean. I really hope its just updating the penalty to be consistent and these other articles just mistakenly added this "Hand-offs will have to be behind the quarterback or equal to the quarterback.".

 

I'd have thought a change like this would be bigger news so maybe you are right.

 

NFL site simply says they are bringing the rule in line with illegal forward passes as you state:

 

https://operations.nfl.com/updates/the-game/approved-2023-playing-rules/

 

12.      By Competition Committee; to make the penalty for illegally handing the ball forward consistent with other illegal acts, such as illegal forward passes.

 

[Rockinon]

I like the read option sprinkled in, but do not like seeing it done often simply because it does get blown up when the defense begins to anticipate it. Josh was killing it with the read option 2 years ago, but last year, it didn't work that well. Defenses are adjusting to it. The thing that drove me nuts was how long it took Josh to either hand it off or decide to keep it himself. You have to be decisive so you don't give the defense time to close in. Wait too long, and it won't matter if he keeps it or hands it off. The play gets blown up.

Edited June 10, 2023 by Rockinon

[NewEra]

19 hours ago, Dr.Mantis_Toboggan said:

“Rule change: A launch, which is a personal foul (15-yard penalty), is now if a player leaves one or both feet to make a tackle.”

 

Donte Whitner never would’ve seen a second contract in today’s league…

This is nuts.  
 

“leaves one or both feet to make a tackle”—

wth is going on here?

 

A player can’t leave ONE foot to make a tackle?  They can’t be serious. If this is true, the league is just opening up doors to control outcomes even more than it already does.  This is crazy.  
 

am I misinterpreting something?  🤦🏻‍♂️ 

[letsgoteam]

21 hours ago, Allen2Diggs said:

That rule change would also completely negate those forward push-pass jet sweeps (which I hope we'll do frequently with Deonte Harty)

If the QB "throws it" (the few inch toss up thing) then its considered a pass. Which would still be legal? 

I was thinking the same thing. So if a player "dives" to make a shoe string tackle, etc then its illegal?

 

  

47 minutes ago, NewEra said:

This is nuts.  
 

“leaves one or both feet to make a tackle”—

wth is going on here?

 

A player can’t leave ONE foot to make a tackle?  They can’t be serious. If this is true, the league is just opening up doors to control outcomes even more than it already does.  This is crazy.  
 

am I misinterpreting something?  🤦🏻‍♂️ 

 

Agreed, what if a player dives for a shoe string tackle, etc.

 

Lastly, since we are talking about rules...

Does anyone know why the NFL makes teams have inactive players? I think it would be easier for everyone and safer if they just allowed all 53 active for game days. You could still even have the Practice Squad call ups that fill in for players that are ruled out (injuries, etc) for games but still on the 53.

Edited June 10, 2023 by letsgoteam

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, NewEra said:

This is nuts.  
 

“leaves one or both feet to make a tackle”—

wth is going on here?

 

A player can’t leave ONE foot to make a tackle?  They can’t be serious. If this is true, the league is just opening up doors to control outcomes even more than it already does.  This is crazy.  
 

am I misinterpreting something?  🤦🏻‍♂️ 

 

 

IMO, this likely isn't the whole rule, it's just saying how one term from the rule will be interpreted differently than it has been in the past.

[Billy Claude]

 

 

1 hour ago, letsgoteam said:

If the QB "throws it" (the few inch toss up thing) then its considered a pass. Which would still be legal? 

I was thinking the same thing. So if a player "dives" to make a shoe string tackle, etc then its illegal?

 

  

 

Agreed, what if a player dives for a shoe string tackle, etc.

 

Lastly, since we are talking about rules...

Does anyone know why the NFL makes teams have inactive players? I think it would be easier for everyone and safer if they just allowed all 53 active for game days. You could still even have the Practice Squad call ups that fill in for players that are ruled out (injuries, etc) for games but still on the 53.

 

Agree that the rule change will add further judgment calls but a shoestring tackle has been and will continue to be legal even if the player leaves both feet:

 

It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves one or both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet .