NFL will look at the fumble-out-of-end-zone rule

[DrBob806]

5 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Reaching is stupid.  Got it

We've all yelled at our TV or in the stadium in that situation. 

 

 

[frostbitmic]

What if the ball rolls out of the back of the end zone ?

 

[Don Otreply]

Y’all remember the KC game at home a few years back? We fumbled out the back of the end zone and lost the game…, We drove up from Connecticut for that game, thought we were going to win until that play…, 

 

GO BILLS!!!

[eball]

1 hour ago, Warcodered said:

Yeah they still keep the ball that they didn't possess in that moment or recover so yeah rewarded, they lost a down, why the ***** wouldn't they it's treated like a recovery and if you recover the fumble and it's not a first down it's the next down. You're not suggesting you can fumble recover the ball and get a fresh set of downs? The defense doesn't get the ball because they didn't possess it, sure neither did the offense they lost it the ball went out of bounds and the rule in the regular part of the field rewards them with the ball back, but in the endzone it gives it to the defense.

 

I'm trying, but i'm not seeing your logic.

 

[Warcodered]

7 minutes ago, eball said:

 

I'm trying, but i'm not seeing your logic.

 

Right so the offense fumbles the ball, they've lost possession of it, they have to recover it to keep it, if the defense recovers it it's theirs. So at that point the ball is on the ground and there's two teams equally scrambling to get the ball. But with the sideline rule despite the fact that neither team has gained possession of the ball it gives the ball to one of them, so one of them gets rewarded despite not actually doing anything. For all of the field except the endzones it gives the ball to the offense, but in those two areas it gives it to the defense.

[Doc Brown]

48 minutes ago, frostbitmic said:

What if the ball rolls out of the back of the end zone ?

 

Happened to Bryce Brown against KC.  It’s a touchback for the defense.

[Big Turk]

20 hours ago, Realist said:

I would say, play it like an incomplete pass. Ball goes out of the end zone, go back to the original line of scrimmage and next down.

 

That doesn't make any sense.  There is no rule for a fumble where that would happen. However, there is a rule where the ball would be marked where the fumble initiated from already in place during certain points of the game, so that would be the most likely solution.

 

11 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Right so the offense fumbles the ball, they've lost possession of it, they have to recover it to keep it, if the defense recovers it it's theirs. So at that point the ball is on the ground and there's two teams equally scrambling to get the ball. But with the sideline rule despite the fact that neither team has gained possession of the ball it gives the ball to one of them, so one of them gets rewarded despite not actually doing anything. For all of the field except the endzones it gives the ball to the offense, but in those two areas it gives it to the defense.

 

It isn't that they get rewarded, it's that it reverts to the team who possessed it last. Same thing would happen on a fumble recovery or INT by the defense after they gain possession and they then fumble and it goes out of bounds.  The team who had possession last retains it.

Edited December 15, 2023 by Big Turk

[Prospector]

Or it can be like the forward fumbling rule... Just give the offense the ball where the player fumbled

[Big Turk]

20 hours ago, BuffBillsForLife said:

What would they change it to?  Offense gets the ball at the 1?  It can't be a TD.

 

It's very simple...they would simply combine 2 rules that are already in place and extend it to include anytime a ball is fumbled into and thru an endzone.  I would argue this should ONLY be in play for balls that are fumbled out of bounds sideways, not THRU the back of the endzone because in that case the offensive team likely had a mad scramble to attempt to recover the ball and had at least a full 10 yards to get it back, so that should then be the defenses ball.  Completely different for a player reaching towards the goalline and fumbling it barely through the side line of the endzone.

 

1)  Apply the rule that the ball is dead where it was fumbled at if not recovered by the same player within the last 2 minutes of a half.

2) Apply the rule that if a fumble goes out of bounds it reverts to the team who last possessed it legally.

 

These two rules now make it so the ball is dead where the fumble initiated and the team who last legally possessed it maintains control.  

 

Simple, easy and generally follows the rules that are already in place, not some of the crazy rules people are coming up with.

Edited December 15, 2023 by Big Turk

[Prospector]

5 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

It's very simple...they would simply combine 2 rules that are already in place and extend it to include anytime a ball is fumbled into and thru an endzone.  I would argue this should ONLY be in play for balls that are fumbled out of bounds sideways, not THRU the back of the endzone because in that case the offensive team likely had a mad scramble to attempt to recover the ball and had at least a full 10 yards to get it back, so that should then be the defenses ball.  Completely different for a player reaching towards the goalline and fumbling it barely through the side line of the endzone.

 

1)  Apply the rule that the ball is dead where it was fumbled at if not recovered by the same player within the last 2 minutes of a half.

2) Apply the rule that if a fumble goes out of bounds it reverts to the team who last possessed it legally.

 

These two rules now make it so the ball is dead where the fumble initiated and the team who last legally possessed it maintains control.  

 

Simple, easy and generally follows the rules that are already in place, not some of the crazy rules people are coming up with.

This is what I was thinking. It makes way more sense than all the other wacky options people have suggested... and better than the current rule.

[Orlando Tim]

I like the touchback rule, the risk/reward of stretching out for the end zone is something that needs to remain in my mind. I know I am in minority but that rule is not one that should change.

[SinatraSinger]

I'll tell you a rule that should change:...............The being able to call fair catch on a kick off and automatically get the ball at the 25 yard line.  I hate that rule.  If you call a fair catch on a punt at the 5 yard line you get the ball at the 5 yard line, not on a kick off it goes to the 25 yard line.  It takes away the strategy of trying to force the other team to return the ball.  It irritates the crap out of me.

[Peter]

22 hours ago, Rubes said:

NFL will look at the fumble-out-of-end-zone rule

 

 

Good riddance, hope they come to their senses.
 

It is indeed a horrible rule and nonsensical.

[Prospector]

42 minutes ago, SinatraSinger said:

I'll tell you a rule that should change:...............The being able to call fair catch on a kick off and automatically get the ball at the 25 yard line.  I hate that rule.  If you call a fair catch on a punt at the 5 yard line you get the ball at the 5 yard line, not on a kick off it goes to the 25 yard line.  It takes away the strategy of trying to force the other team to return the ball.  It irritates the crap out of me.

Agreed, but the NFL doesn't want teams to return the kickoff

[Straight Hucklebuck]

Keep it the same. 

[frostbitmic]

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Happened to Bryce Brown against KC.  It’s a touchback for the defense.

Thank you ... So my next stupid question is ... Why would there be a difference to the ball going out of the back of the end zone and the side of the end zone ? ... The end zone is the end zone, you're either in it or you aren't.

[Buffalo03]

5 hours ago, Don Otreply said:

Y’all remember the KC game at home a few years back? We fumbled out the back of the end zone and lost the game…, We drove up from Connecticut for that game, thought we were going to win until that play…, 

 

GO BILLS!!!

You mean the Bryce Brown fumble 9 years ago?

[Don Otreply]

4 hours ago, Buffalo03 said:

You mean the Bryce Brown fumble 9 years ago?

Yup, when you’re old that is a few years ago, 😁

[Doc Brown]

7 hours ago, frostbitmic said:

Thank you ... So my next stupid question is ... Why would there be a difference to the ball going out of the back of the end zone and the side of the end zone ? ... The end zone is the end zone, you're either in it or you aren't.

There isn't a difference.

[Scott7975]

Good I hate this rule.  At least give the ball back to the offense even if its at the original line of scrimmage.  Thats far better than awarding an undeserved touchback.  Personally I think the ball should just go to where the fumble occurred.  Why not?

Edited December 16, 2023 by Scott7975

[Bookie Man]

What happens if it's a sack fumble that goes out of the endzone?

Edited December 16, 2023 by Alpo Chino

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

Good I hate this rule.  At least give the ball back to the offense even if its at the original line of scrimmage.  Thats far better than awarding an undeserved touchback.  Personally I think the ball should just go to where the fumble occurred.  Why not?

 

So my answer on why not is becauae the offense has fumbled the ball and not recovered it. They should suffer some ill effect from that IMO. Hence I prefer the original line of scrimmage option. 

4 hours ago, Alpo Chino said:

What happens if it's a sack fumble that goes out of the endzone?

 

If the defense forces a sack fumble and the ball goes out of the endzone without another defensive player touching it (i.e. so a defender can't just knock it out on purpose) I'd award a safety. 

[Scott7975]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

So my answer on why not is becauae the offense has fumbled the ball and not recovered it. They should suffer some ill effect from that IMO. Hence I prefer the original line of scrimmage option. 

 

 

If this happened on the rest of the field, like lets say someone fumbled and the ball went out the sideline on the 10 after gaining 20 yards, would they not get the ball at the 10?  If it went out at the 1 then they would get the ball at the 1 yes?  Why should it be different if the ball went a yard further and went out after the goal line?  Thats why I don't understand that view.

 

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

If this happened on the rest of the field, like lets say someone fumbled and the ball went out the sideline on the 10 after gaining 20 yards, would they not get the ball at the 10?  If it went out at the 1 then they would get the ball at the 1 yes?  Why should it be different if the ball went a yard further and went out after the goal line?  Thats why I don't understand that view.

 

 

No I've said above I'd change it at the sideline too and have long been of this view. If the offense fumbles and does not recover that fumble there should be consequences for that. I'd go back to the line of scrimmage and treat it like an incomplete pass. If a defense forces a fumble they should get some benefit of that even if the ball goes out at the sideline.

 

An unrecovered fumble out of bounds should essentially be a neutral play IMO. My only exception would be if a defense forced a fumble that went out of the back of the endzone untouched by another player in which case I would give them a safety not just a touchback. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by GunnerBill

[Scott7975]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

No I've said above I'd change it at the sideline too and have long been of this view. If the offense fumbles and does not recover that fumble there should be consequences for that. I'd go back to the line of scrimmage and treat it like an incomplete pass. If a defense forces a fumble they should get some benefit of that even if the ball goes out at the sideline.

 

An unrecovered fumble out of bounds should essentially be a neutral play IMO. My only exception would be if a defense forced a fumble that went out of the back of the endzone untouched by another player in which case I would give them a safety not just a touchback. 

 

Ok, I don't agree with you, but your stance on the endzone stuff makes sense if that's the way it worked for the rest of the game.  It doesn't work that way though and it's unlikely to change.

 

To me, the benefit of the defense causing the fumble is a chance at getting the ball back.  If they don't capitalize on that chance and recover then that's just not completing the opportunity.

[Billy Claude]

Obvious solution, offense fumbles out of bounds, 5 yard penalty from spot of fumble, plus loss of down.

 

The same rule applies everywhere except in the offense's own end zone where it counts as a safety similar to the way a holding call in the end zone would.

 

That would give you a consistent set of rules everywhere on the field.  If you make it a 10-yard penalty, it would effectively be the same as illegal batting and the referee would not have to judge whether the offensive player intentionally knocked it out of bounds or not.

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Billy Claude

[GunnerBill]

58 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Ok, I don't agree with you, but your stance on the endzone stuff makes sense if that's the way it worked for the rest of the game.  It doesn't work that way though and it's unlikely to change.

 

To me, the benefit of the defense causing the fumble is a chance at getting the ball back.  If they don't capitalize on that chance and recover then that's just not completing the opportunity.

 

I agree it is unlikely to change more widely. But I still think that is the best balance of fairness. The rule at the moment over favours the offense everywhere but through the endzone where it over favours the defense . 

[longtimebillsfan]

On 12/14/2023 at 2:24 PM, NewEra said:

Giving the opposing team the possession of the ball for potentially doing nothing is perfect?  🤷🏻‍♂️ 

 

I’d give the ball to the offense somewhere between the 10 and the 20.  The defense shouldn’t get the ball unless they recover it imo. 

Not sure this makes since.

 

In your scenario, if a team had the ball on their own one yard like, they could just fumble the ball out of the end zone and improve their position by 10 to 20 yards.

 

That would never work.

[NewEra]

14 minutes ago, longtimebillsfan said:

Not sure this makes since.

 

In your scenario, if a team had the ball on their own one yard like, they could just fumble the ball out of the end zone and improve their position by 10 to 20 yards.

 

That would never work.

🤦🏻‍♂️ 

 

Wrong end zone my man.  Only if the offense fumbles the ball out of the end zone they are scoring on.  If it’s the other end zone, it’s a safety for the defense….

[SinceThe70s]

25 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree it is unlikely to change more widely. But I still think that is the best balance of fairness. The rule at the moment over favours the offense everywhere but through the endzone where it over favours the defense . 

 

This is exactly why I think giving possession to the defense at the spot of the fumble when it's out of the end zone makes the most sense. It preserves the field position advantage for the offense.

 

I think the fundamental difference of opinion on this is how folks view "out of bounds" vs. "out of the end zone". IMO they are fundamentally different and  should be treated that way. Others see them as fundamentally the same.

[longtimebillsfan]

9 minutes ago, NewEra said:

🤦🏻‍♂️

 

Wrong end zone my man.  Only if the offense fumbles the ball out of the end zone they are scoring on.  If it’s the other end zone, it’s a safety for the defense….

True.

 

My bad.

[Mr. WEO]

6 pages!!

 

 

this happens so rarely why bother changing it?

[Billsatlastin2018]

No, it’s not!

 

A WR/TE extending the ball over the GL as they fall to the ground, subsequently lose it and get no TD- IS!

 

Unlike a RB/QB that can do exactly the same thing and score.

[Doc]

On 12/14/2023 at 5:22 PM, Realist said:

I would say, play it like an incomplete pass. Ball goes out of the end zone, go back to the original line of scrimmage and next down.

 

I'd say put the ball at the spot it was fumbled.  I'd also change the rule and say that if the offensive team recovers a fumble downfield (i.e. past the LOS), the ball goes back to where it was fumbled.  If they recover it behind the LOS or the defense recovers it, it's where the ball is when recovered.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Disagree!

 

It's the last hope for a defender trying. Knock it out before the goal line and it should reward the D!!!

 

Leon Lett anyone?

[Big Turk]

On 12/15/2023 at 2:38 PM, SinatraSinger said:

I'll tell you a rule that should change:...............The being able to call fair catch on a kick off and automatically get the ball at the 25 yard line.  I hate that rule.  If you call a fair catch on a punt at the 5 yard line you get the ball at the 5 yard line, not on a kick off it goes to the 25 yard line.  It takes away the strategy of trying to force the other team to return the ball.  It irritates the crap out of me.

 

The rule is in place to discourage kickoffs as much as possible due to the high injury rate on them.  

[LarryMadman]

On 12/14/2023 at 5:18 PM, BuffBillsForLife said:

What would they change it to?  Offense gets the ball at the 1?  It can't be a TD.

Offense keeps the ball where the fumble happened. Same as when fumbled out of bounds.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

If the ball is fumbled out of the end zone, the patriots get a third rd comp pick 

[SinatraSinger]

On 12/16/2023 at 11:31 PM, Big Turk said:

 

The rule is in place to discourage kickoffs as much as possible due to the high injury rate on them.  

I understand that the NFL is trying to cut down on the injury rate on returns, what I don't understand is the fact they they get the ball out to the 25 yard line.  If ou call a fair catch at the 10 then you get the ball at the 10.

 

Also if they are trying to cut down on injuries why not do the same on Punts.  If the ball is kicked into the end zone on a punt it goes to the 20 yard line, so why not do the same on punts as they do on kick offs.  If you call a fair catch on a punt inside the 20 then it automatically goes to the 20, that would be the same as the kick off rule other then the yard line.   But they don't, so why is a fair catch on the kick off going to the 25 yard line.  I would think that more injuries happen on punt returns then kickoff returns.