Is the fumble out of the end zone rule wrong?

[ichigo1057]

2 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's a terrible rule and needs to be changed. Change of possession shouldn't occur without the defense actually securing possession of the ball.

Agreed. I'd say ball should be spotted where the ball initially came out or at the 25 as was suggested.

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, ichigo1057 said:

Agreed. I'd say ball should be spotted where the ball initially came out or at the 25 as was suggested.

25 yard line wouldn’t work. Teams would purposely fumble at the end of games to burn the clock. 

[1of10Charnatives]

1 hour ago, Popsickle said:

By NFL standards this was a good post.

 

Edit: By NFL stands this was a bad post. 

I C wat U did thar

[Peon Awesome]

2 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's a terrible rule and needs to be changed. Change of possession shouldn't occur without the defense actually securing possession of the ball.

100% agree. I think you either keep it at the spot of the fumble or push it back to the 20 with the down correlating to the initial 1st down marker (e.g. if it was 3rd down when the fumble occurred and the 1st down marker was the 10 yard line, it becomes 4th and 10). Either way would be leaps and bounds better than the current rule.

[TheCasillas]

2 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

100% agree. I think you either keep it at the spot of the fumble or push it back to the 20 with the down correlating to the initial 1st down marker (e.g. if it was 3rd down when the fumble occurred and the 1st down marker was the 10 yard line, it becomes 4th and 10). Either way would be leaps and bounds better than the current rule.

So then goal to go from the 20 if you fumble on at the goal line if it was 2nd goal?

[Peon Awesome]

Just now, TheCasillas said:

So then goal to go from the 20 if you fumble on at the goalie if it was 2nd goal?

Yeah it would become 3rd and goal from the 20 if that's what you're asking. Still punishes the team for fumbling out of the end zone but they keep possession and are at least in play for a field goal. 

[TheCasillas]

9 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Yeah it would become 3rd and goal from the 20 if that's what you're asking. Still punishes the team for fumbling out of the end zone but they keep possession and are at least in play for a field goal. 

How should the nfl respond to this situation... let’s use a panthers vs ravens hypothetical.

ravens have the ball 1st and 10 on CAR 11. ravens are up 1 with 2:30 to go. Panthers have 3 timeouts.

ravens use two downs, and cause us to

use our time outs. Now on the next down they fumble out of the end zone on purpose... 

two questions:

1. Does the ravens get a first down and placed back on the twenty? (They technically got the first down.)

2. Now move them back ten yards, and they get a carry that breaks free to the end zone, and they purposely fumble, wouldn’t that give them said down and ten? Meaning a bonus down to tick the clock? Or are you suggesting a loss of down?

[Peon Awesome]

11 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

How should the nfl respond to this situation... let’s use a panthers vs ravens hypothetical.

ravens have the ball 1st and 10 on CAR 11. ravens are up 1 with 2:30 to go. Panthers have 3 timeouts.

ravens use two downs, and cause us to

use our time outs. Now on the next down they fumble out of the end zone on purpose... 

two questions:

1. Does the ravens get a first down and placed back on the twenty? (They technically got the first down.)

2. Now move them back ten yards, and they get a carry that breaks free to the end zone, and they purposely fumble, wouldn’t that give them said down and ten? Meaning a bonus down to tick the clock? Or are you suggesting a loss of down?

In that scenario, it would be 4th and 19 for the Ravens. Think of it like the illegal forward pass penalty. You lose 5 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. It doesn't matter if the player caught it and made the 1st down. Same thing here. If it's easier to conceptualize, we could even make it a penalty on the offense. Ref: "Illegal forward fumble out of the end zone. Ball will be placed on the 20 yard line, loss of down"

[TheCasillas]

Just now, Peon Awesome said:

In that scenario, it would be 4th and 19 for the Ravens. Think of it like the illegal forward pass penalty. You lose 5 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. It doesn't matter if the player caught it and made the 1st down. Same thing here. If it's easier to conceptualize, we could even make it a penalty on the offense. Ref: "Illegal forward fumble out of the end zone. Ball will be placed on the 20 yard line, loss of down"

Interesting concept.

So basically changing one rule and adding another. So if a player purposely fumbles or accidentally fumbles out of the end zone there is going to be a penalty or punishment to the offense? That would be a nightmare for teams if the refs call accidents international. All of this sounds very challenging but maybe it could happen. I don’t see a need for the rule change, but we will see.

[Pimpdaddy]

2 hours ago, tijo said:

Don't fumble the ball near the endzone if you don't want the other team to have it. I got no sympathy for offensive players reaching out to the endzone, not protecting the ball. If the Browns receiver just goes down with the ball, they have 1st and goal at the 1. It's up to the coaches to teach that. 

yea...i agree but when you get speared in the head...that should over rule the fumble...jeez. and it was a reviewable call.

[Peon Awesome]

1 minute ago, TheCasillas said:

Interesting concept.

So basically changing one rule and adding another. So if a player purposely fumbles or accidentally fumbles out of the end zone there is going to be a penalty or punishment to the offense? That would be a nightmare for teams if the refs call accidents international. All of this sounds very challenging but maybe it could happen. I don’t see a need for the rule change, but we will see.

Well I'm suggesting calling it a penalty regardless of intention. Even if accidental, the rule applies. It's just an idea for those clamoring to say the offense should get punished for fumbling. It's still a punishment but not as unfairly crippling as the change of possession. I'm also perfectly fine with just giving the ball back to the offense wherever it was fumbled which is the rule anywhere else on the field. That will still take care of your concern about purposely fumbling because a fumble from the 1 yard line would be the same thing as being down at the 1 yard line. No advantage to purposely fumbling for clock purposes.

[TheCasillas]

4 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Well I'm suggesting calling it a penalty regardless of intention. Even if accidental, the rule applies. It's just an idea for those clamoring to say the offense should get punished for fumbling. It's still a punishment but not as unfairly crippling as the change of possession. I'm also perfectly fine with just giving the ball back to the offense wherever it was fumbled which is the rule anywhere else on the field. That will still take care of your concern about purposely fumbling because a fumble from the 1 yard line would be the same thing as being down at the 1 yard line. No advantage to purposely fumbling for clock purposes.

I think then this would allow teams to be wreckless on the goal line and no repercussion for the offense. Not sure I agree with that. Regardless, I think my stance on it is that this something that so rarely impacts the game and really does come off as a fair rule, that it shouldn’t need to be changed

[Peon Awesome]

2 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

I think then this would allow teams to be wreckless on the goal line and no repercussion for the offense. Not sure I agree with that. Regardless, I think my stance on it is that this something that so rarely impacts the game and really does come off as a fair rule, that it shouldn’t need to be changed

Well then the penalty to the 20 is a fair compromise. You think a team that is "reckless" on 2nd and goal from the 1 and fumbles out of bounds is going to be thrilled being 3rd and goal from the 20? That's a huge impact. 

A team drives all the way down the field only to fumble on the goal line and the defense doesn't even have to recover and gets it back, how does that make sense? That doesn't apply to anywhere else on the field. It doesn't need to impact every game to be a terrible rule. It just had a major impact on an AFC divisional playoff game. I really hope if any good comes of it happening in the playoffs is the competition committee actually seriously looks into modifying it.

[Catsfan69]

3 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

It's a terrible rule and needs to be changed. Change of possession shouldn't occur without the defense actually securing possession of the ball.

It's fair.

If you fumble the ball out of your own end zone it's a safety.

It's set up that way to prevent people from doing it on purpose to achieve a positive outcome.