The NFL offseason is well underway. Most people remain focused on all of the free agency signings that are happening daily. What isn’t in focus is the multiple rule proposals made by various teams in the league. To me, some should without a doubt be passed. Others are proposed just because a team lost off of the current rule.
Kansas City’s Overtime Proposal
- Allow both teams the opportunity to possess the ball at least one time in overtime, even if the first team to possess the ball in overtime scores a touchdown.
- Eliminate overtime from the preseason.
- Eliminate overtime coin toss so that the winner of the initial coin toss to begin the game may choose whether to kick or receive or which goal to defend.
If it wasn’t clear this past season, the Chiefs had one of their best offensive seasons yet. Between QB Patrick Mahomes having a record-breaking year, RB Kareem Hunt’s release, and WR Tyreek Hill & Travis Kelce’s 1,000-yard seasons, the Chiefs were just on another level. Despite having one of the worst defenses in the league, Kansas City managed to pull it all together. In the AFC Championship game, they los to the New England Patriots 37-31 in overtime.
This proposal was clearly prompted by this game. As soon as the Patriots won the coin toss, it was expected that the Pats were going to get the ball into the endzone first. Andy Reid and co. know that if the ball was in Patrick Mahomes’ hands, the Chiefs would’ve gone to the Super Bowl. In the eyes of Kansas City, knowing they have one of the more potent and efficient offenses in the league, they believe they can go toe-to-toe with any team in the league. Off a single coin-toss, the game could be decided just like that. However, this doesn’t mean that this is a proposal that should go through.
A Wasteful Proposal
In the many overtime games we’ve had in the playoffs, why is it now that this conversation has fired up? It must be because, this season, the record-breaking quarterback that had 50 touchdown passes on the season lost. But, why should only one side of the ball mater? Defense matters too, and that’s the reason this proposal should just be thrown in the trash. As much as you need the offense to win football games, you need your defense too.
Patrick Mahomes had an unreal season which included highlight play after highlight play. Many fans & media members know what Mahomes is capable of and believe he would’ve been the one to slay Brady if the Chiefs got the ball. But why blame the rules? That Kansas City defense is why this rule is even being proposed. As alluded to before, an offense isn’t everything. This proposal basically tells us that the Chiefs think the Patriots are invincible in overtime. If a team really thinks they would’ve/could’ve won in overtime, they should’ve just won the coin toss. But those must be the things that Brady and Belichick prompt you to do.
Denver’s Conversion Proposal
- Provide an alternative to the onside kick that would allow a team who is trailing in the game an opportunity to maintain possession of the ball after scoring.
This is a rather interesting proposal, to say the least. Rumor has it that the “alternative” would be a 4th-&-15 conversion. Over the years, there have been changes to the rulebook that make it nearly impossible for onside kicks to be converted. The regular season had a total of 53 onside kicks with only four being recovered by that team. That makes for a 7.5 conversion percentage with is a low under the various new kicking rules. Although this means the injury rate was bound to decrease, this still gives teams little to no chance to get themselves the ball back in a tight game. Maybe the low conversion rate leaves more room for unpredictability, but when it’s a playoff game at least, there must be an alternative.
The 4th-&-15 conversion rule is just the alternative the NFL needs. Knowing that a team has a chance to keep a close game going just adds excitement for fans. Imagine if the Patriots were down, and they had to convert on 4th-&-15. Not only would fans be on the edge of their seat, but it would result in either many smiles or many pissed off fans. Having this rule gives teams the opportunity to run a do-or-die play that doesn’t even have to be a hail mary. Unlike the Chiefs’ rule proposal, this is one that should be passed.
The Multitude of Instant Replay Proposals
Washington Redskins
- Subject all plays that occur during a game to coaches’ challenge by teams or review by the Officiating department in the instant replay system.
- Review personal fouls as reviewable plays in the instant replay system.
Denver Broncos
- All fourth down plays that are spotted short of the line to gain or goal line to be subject to automatic review in the instant replay system.
- Add all try attempts (Extra point or Two-point conversion) to be subject to automatic review in the instant replay system.
Philadelphia Eagles
- Add scoring plays and turnovers negated by a foul to be subject to automatic review in the instant replay system.
- Add a review of designated player safety-related fouls (called or not called on the field) as plays subject to coaches’ challenge in the instant replay system.
Kansas City Chiefs
- Add a review of personal fouls (called or not called on the field) as plays subject to coaches’ challenge in the instant replay system.
What do all of these specific rule change proposals have in common? Instant replays. This year there was a fair share of blown calls by the referees. Most notably in the NFC Championship when Rams CB Nickell Robey-Coleman committed an obvious pass interference penalty on Saints WR Tommylee Lewis. All of these teams seem like they want to create the perfect game. No mistakes. But in reality, there are always going to be things the referees mess up.
Washington is proposing that every single play is able to be challenged. It’s understandable, but how bad will the coaches drag it out? The slightest of calls with barely any contact can have a challenge initiated by coaches and that just causes problems. These problems relate to the fans. This is because no-one wants to see games get dragged out due to a massive time increase.
The Eagles have a solid argument in wanting to review player safety-related fouls because the safety of the players should be one of the main priorities. Some of the other proposals include reviewing negated scoring plays and turnovers which is understandable, as teams just want clarity with their plays. But overall, the league shouldn’t pass new rules that’ll drag out a football game.
Yes, we want the most accurate and error-free game possible, but sometimes people make mistakes. Mistakes such as the one in the NFC Championship, with new rules, wouldn’t happen again. For basic errors, however, there’s no reason to massively change the rulebook. We need referees to recognize and fix their mistakes.
Conclusion
These teams clearly want big changes within the NFL. Some of these changes are to rules that have been in place for a long time. But the NFL must consider how this will affect players safety, us as fans, and them as a business. Is dragging on games really what’s best? Maybe a 4th-&-15 conversion would be nice, but changing overtime rules is not. Let me know what you think below.