NFL News

[chemiclord]

Oh, got 'im!

[Dan V]

They should allow triple digits for guys who weigh over 300 pounds. Who is going to be the first #747?

Earlene Brown beat you to it. (us old folks know she was a roller derby LA Thunderbird in the 1970's . A big fat gal that wore the #747

[Masspartan]

OJ Howard vs Pitts

Who would you choose?

Pitts times a zilly

[edindetroit]

Earlene Brown beat you to it. (us old folks know she was a roller derby LA Thunderbird in the 1970's . A big fat gal that wore the #747

747.jpg

[jaadam4]

Watson is now facing a criminal complaint. Shits about to get real in Houston

[Fraquar]

They should allow triple digits for guys who weigh over 300 pounds. Who is going to be the first #747?

Imagine a DT with the last name of Bettercall - sporting 911.

[Futureshock]

If they would have traded him...

[Futureshock]

NFL likely to eliminate Week 1 MNF doubleheader

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 5, 2021, 6:26 AM EDT

Getty Images

Since 2006, the NFL has concluded every Week One with a Monday night doubleheader. That tradition may come to an end in 2021.

Peter King reports in this week’s Football Morning in America that the NFL plans to scrap the doubleheader and ESPN is likely to have one Monday night game in Week One this season.

The plan is for ESPN to instead televise a Saturday doubleheader in Week 18, with the league likely to put two games with playoff implications into the Saturday slots, therefore giving two good games a nationally televised audience.

The Monday night Week One doubleheader ratings were down last season, while a Saturday doubleheader featuring two games with playoff implications is sure to generate great ratings, so ESPN is surely happy with the arrangement.

The new arrangement means Week One will have one game Thursday night, 13 games Sunday afternoon, one game Sunday night and one game Monday night, while Week 18 will have two games Saturday, 13 games Sunday afternoon and one game Sunday night.

[Futureshock]

Bears propose rule change for penalties on consecutive extra point tries

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 4, 2021, 2:33 PM EDT

Getty Images

One of the strangest endings to an NFL game in recent memory came in 2019, when the Broncos benefited from an obscure rule that allowed them to try a two-point conversion from the 1-yard line thanks to a penalty committed by the Bears, even though the Broncos had also committed a penalty prior to their initial two-point conversion attempt.

Now the Bears want to change that rule.

In a proposal that NFL owners will vote on at the upcoming league meeting, the Bears are asking for a rule change that would ensure that all penalties are enforced if penalties are called on consecutive extra point or two-point conversion attempts.

Here’s what happened in that 2019 game: The Broncos scored a touchdown with 31 seconds left to make the score 13-12 Bears. The Broncos lined up for a two-point conversion, but they were flagged for delay of game. Not wanting to try the conversion from the 7-yard line, Denver opted to kick the extra point — which missed. Except that the Bears jumped offside, and when the Broncos accepted that penalty, they chose to go for two again. This time it was from the 1-yard line because of the Chicago penalty, and Denver converted to take a 14-13 lead.

Many fans were surprised to learn the Broncos got to take their two-point conversion attempt from the 1-yard line, which effectively treated Denver’s previous delay of game penalty as if it never happened. But that’s the way the rules are currently enforced. Under the Bears’ proposal, the Broncos’ previous penalty still would have counted, and Denver would not have been able to line up at the 1-yard line for the two-point conversion.

In that 2019 game, the Bears managed to get into field goal range and kick a game-winner as time expired, so the obscure rule didn’t actually cost Chicago the game. But the Bears still thought it was unfair, and they want to change it.

[Futureshock]

NFL to vote on expanding rule penalizing blocking below the waist

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 4, 2021, 5:54 AM EDT

Getty Images

More flags on blocks below the waist may be thrown in 2021, if a new rule proposal passes.

The NFL owners will vote on a rule that would greatly expand the prohibition on blocking below the waist, making such blocks illegal by offensive and defensive players if contact occurs beyond five yards on either side of the line of scrimmage and more than two yards outside of either offensive tackle.

Former NFL referee Terry McAulay, who analyzes officiating for NBC Sports, says the new rule would be a significant change, noting that it would give the NFL more restrictions against blocking below the waist than the NCAA has.

All such illegal blocks would carry a 15-yard penalty.

This might result in more flags being thrown, but it also might result in fewer lower body injuries, as players often complain that when their opponents block them low, it risks serious knee injuries. When the Competition Committee proposes a rule for player safety, the NFL owners rarely vote it down, so this rule has a good chance of passing.

[Futureshock]

Report: 49ers want a first-round pick for Jimmy Garoppolo

Posted by Mike Florio on April 3, 2021, 8:23 PM EDT

Getty Images

Yes, Jimmy Garoppolo remains in the 49ers’ plans. Those plans include trying to trade him for more than they gave up to get him.

More than three years after acquiring Garoppolo from the Patriots for a second-round draft pick, the 49ers want a first-round pick for the balance of Garoppolo’s contract, according to Mike Giardi of NFL Media.

That’s obviously too much. Letting it be known they want a first-rounder, however, likely means that they’d take less via the negotiation process.

The separate challenge comes from Garoppolo’s compensation. He’s due to make $25 million in 2021. Would anyone actually pay him that much this year, given that he has missed 23 games in three seasons?

Time continues to be on the team’s side. As long as they’re willing to carry his cap number through the offseason, there’s no rush to trade him. The start of on-field offseason workouts and then training camp become decision points, especially if the 49ers are concerned about an in-house (wait for it) schism among the pro-Jimmy G players and those who align behind whoever they take with the third overall pick in the draft.

If the 49ers can hold it all together while confirming that the rookie is ready for Week One, the 49ers could get lucky, like the Eagles did in 2016. A fluke torn ACL suffered by Teddy Bridgewater in late August opened the door for a first-round and fourth-round Labor Dat weekend windfall for Sam Bradford.

However it all plays out, it’s hard to imagine the 49ers keeping Garoppolo at $25 million for 2021, unless the guy they pick with No. 3 ends up being wholly unable and unfit to ascend to the starting job right out of the gates. If they can get significant compensation for the balance of his contract before camp opens, however, that’s a risk they’d probably take.

[Mainevent]

Man, I would eliminate the OL being allowed to block below the waist. I'm sure every DL would be happy to not have to worry about OL diving at their knees all the time.

[Fraquar]

Man, I would eliminate ALL blocks below the waist. I mean it's supposed to be a man's game - right?

FIFY.

[Mainevent]

Yeah, I almost said all blocks below the waist. The one instance I waffled on was the poor RB that supposed to take on a charging DL or LB with a head of steam. But cracking down on that would give some advantage back to the defense, when every other rule change tends to go against them.

[Fraquar]

Bears propose rule change for penalties on consecutive extra point tries

Posted by Michael David Smith on April 4, 2021, 2:33 PM EDT

Getty Images

One of the strangest endings to an NFL game in recent memory came in 2019, when the Broncos benefited from an obscure rule that allowed them to try a two-point conversion from the 1-yard line thanks to a penalty committed by the Bears, even though the Broncos had also committed a penalty prior to their initial two-point conversion attempt.

Now the Bears want to change that rule.

In a proposal that NFL owners will vote on at the upcoming league meeting, the Bears are asking for a rule change that would ensure that all penalties are enforced if penalties are called on consecutive extra point or two-point conversion attempts.

Here’s what happened in that 2019 game: The Broncos scored a touchdown with 31 seconds left to make the score 13-12 Bears. The Broncos lined up for a two-point conversion, but they were flagged for delay of game. Not wanting to try the conversion from the 7-yard line, Denver opted to kick the extra point — which missed. Except that the Bears jumped offside, and when the Broncos accepted that penalty, they chose to go for two again. This time it was from the 1-yard line because of the Chicago penalty, and Denver converted to take a 14-13 lead.

Many fans were surprised to learn the Broncos got to take their two-point conversion attempt from the 1-yard line, which effectively treated Denver’s previous delay of game penalty as if it never happened. But that’s the way the rules are currently enforced. Under the Bears’ proposal, the Broncos’ previous penalty still would have counted, and Denver would not have been able to line up at the 1-yard line for the two-point conversion.

In that 2019 game, the Bears managed to get into field goal range and kick a game-winner as time expired, so the obscure rule didn’t actually cost Chicago the game. But the Bears still thought it was unfair, and they want to change it.

Huh? If the ball is spotted at the two - the ball should have been at the two after two 5 yard penalties cancelled each other out.
There isn't a rule problem there. There is no 6 yard penalty for offsides.....