Fanblogs.com: Hold it - NCAA changes facemasking rules for 2008
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
I agree with the rule change, because you should not be charged for incidental facemask.
OU_Ron
· 1 year ago
I think this is great, and it happens in just about every game, good rule change...
Football Picks
· 1 year ago
I agree as well. Good change, the 5 yard penalty was rarely called anymore anyway.
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
I like the idea of 15 yard penalty or no penalty.
War_Eagle_Atlanta
· 1 year ago
I think they should do away with the facemask altogether and go back to leather helmets...
And bring back cleats with real metal spikes. Oh wait. That was baseball. My bad...
PsiChiPsu
· 1 year ago
Whatever became of the rip-away helmet....just a tug and it splits in half....
Skip
· 1 year ago
This makes 100% sense. Thanks NCAA!
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
I don't like the verbage...
A play can be altered or a player inhibited by a hand on the facemask even without "pulling, twisting or turning" it...
Perhaps rewording it to specify the altering of game play due to the hand on the facemask...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Every play can alter a game.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Reread, Tiger...
"the altering of game play due to the hand on the facemask"...
I'm talking about the infraction altering the outcome of the single play that it occurs on...
Not the course of the game itself...
For example, a QB is blitzed and as he is moving to avoid the defender a hand is placed on his facemask that doesn't invlove a "pulling, twisting or turning" of his hat but impedes his vision to where he can't see an open receiver...
In the interpretation of the wording of the rule, this would receive no flag...
But it is most certainly an action that has altered the potential outcome of the play....
Essentially the wording opens up players to being able to use their hands on a face mask in a vision imparing manner thus gaining an unfair advantage, IMHO...
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Look at it this way...
The way this rule has been worded a player can essentailly faceguard (an NCAA no-no) as long as they place ahand on the facemask...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Well if a defender has enough time to set his hand on the qb's fasemask, don't you think that guy could sack the qb.
Well say a 5'9 QB and a 6'7 DT, that would aslo affect the QB's vision, so what now we are going to band people taller than the QB.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Well if a defender has enough time to set his hand on the qb's fasemask, don't you think that guy could sack the qb.
Actually, yes but by being able to legally have hand come in contact with the mask it essentially allows, IMO encourages, the defender to lead with the hand into the face mask while closing on the QB who now has lost a second or two of extra release time because of allowable facemask contact...
There is a large difference in gaining advantage because of actual body size and essentially legalizing faceguarding through contact with the headgear...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Most defenders do lead with there hands to block a throw. Calling a penalty because a defender lead with his hand and incidentally had his hand on the QB's fasemask is one of the reasons they are changing this.........
Well anyway I like this rule change.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
The wording encourages it...
As well as penalizing the defender a full fifteen yards for that same "incidental" contact you are speaking of if the QB's head is even just slightly moved by the contact where as before the incidental conct would have only resulted in a 5 yard penalty...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
This rule was put in place, supposedly, so they won't call it a penalty at all.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Ah...
But the way that it is worded the above scenario WOULD result in a penalty...
And with the incedental 5 yarder judgement c all being removed, it results in a 15 yarder instead...
Regardless of whether if affected the outcome of the play or not...
Again, it's simply the wording that will cause the problem, IMO...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Placing your hand on the facemask is not pulling or twisting.
Porcine
· 1 year ago
I guess we'll see what the ref says.
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Yes, all that matters is the ref's interpretation of the rule.
JB
· 1 year ago
That is the reason for the rule change. to take out the judgement csll on part of the refs
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Almost every call a ref makes is a judgement call.
JB
· 1 year ago
no it isnt, there are penalties....the old way the refs had to make the judgement of whether or not it was incidental
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
True...
But try to come in contact with a facemask moving full speed and see if the guy's head doesn't move...
Incidental or not, your team has just recieved a15 yard penalty rather than the five they would have received last season...
THAT can change the outcome of the entire game...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Yes it can, we just have to trust the ref's to make the right decision........ If you make contact with a guy at full speed, regardless if you touch his facemask, his head is probably going to move.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
And the correct call would be a 15 yard penalty for facemasking...
Regardless of intent...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
If a guy graps your face mask and it helps him get the tackle then it should be a 15 yarder
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Tackling has nothing to do with it, Tiger...
The way it's worded you can grab a facemask essentially as long as the head doesn't move...
If it does you recieve a 15 yard penalty regardless of intent or outcome...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Well gator,
the goal of the guy grapping the face mask is to get the tackle.
In desperation he might grap the mask, then he should get called for a 15. But if he does the thing with the qb from earlier the i do not think he should get called at all.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Mmm, not necessarily...
You see O lineman receive facemask penalties as well as other blockers receive them when a hand inadvertantly jams up into the facemask...
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
And even as you pointed out...
A DL being shoved to to the outside of a QB still attempts to get a hand in just block the passer's view and can easily result in inadvertant contact and gripping of the mask which when continually pushed by the blocker can result in "pulling, twisting or turning" of said QB's head...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
well once again we will have to see how the ref's interpret it, which will be very interesting to see. It has been fun, so agree to disargree
Clemson_Joe
· 1 year ago
Very good point. I agree. It will be interesting to see how the rule is enforced this season.
Ramblin' Gator
· 1 year ago
Good rule change. Now they need to go back and review the helmet-to-helmet personal foul penalty. I noticed several times last season when a QB was about to be sacked and he intentionally dipped his head down, causing helmet contact with the defender, and the defender was flagged for 15 yards. I don't think they need to do away with this foul, but there needs to be greater control on the calling of this penalty.
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
Yes they do need to do something about the helmet to helmet. and they need to do something about cut blocks.
TigerEducated
· 1 year ago
Karma took care of 2007's worst offender, as Mr. Ramsey's officially done with football after a career ending back injury...
I watched the LSU/Auburn replay again last night, and its the most disgusting thing I've seen on a football field since that Miami "soldier" was swinging his helmet around during Coker's last season...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
It could of ended Dorsey's career
TigerEducated
· 1 year ago
Thank God he has a bionic knee...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
haha yup. But he still wasn't as affective as before the injury.
JB
· 1 year ago
It effectivly ruined his season...statistically at least
Clemson_Joe
· 1 year ago
That rule pissed me off more than a few times this past season. It's just a cheap way to draw a penalty. Not that this will mean anything to most of you, but it reminds me of Italian soccer.
Porcine
· 1 year ago
I'll have to take your word for it.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
I know exactly where you're coming from...
Porcine
· 1 year ago
I'm with GH.
"BC"
· 1 year ago
I for one, think that this rule change is a bad one. why? Before, the referees handed out the 5 yarder unless it was blatantly obvious that the guy was brought to the ground by the facemask. Nowww, every single time a player's facemask is touched, they will huddle up and there's a 50% chance your team will be slapped with a 15 yarder. Basically what i'm saying is this - this year, many of the calls that would've been 5 yards last year, will now be 15 yards. especially if you're a visiting team in the SEC, the home field advantage will get the visiting team the 15-yarder every time over a no call. where last year it would've been just 5 yards.
do yall get my drift? its kinda hard to put what im saying in words.
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
I understand completely, it all lies on the ref's judgement.
Regan
· 1 year ago
Excellent point, Bleed Crimson.
Essentially, the refs had 3 options: Not Call, Call (incidental - 5 yds), and Call (flagrant-15 yds).
Now they have only two - Not Call, or Call (flagrant-15 yds).
I understand the idea and am willing to give it a shot for a year to see how it works out. We'll need to watch, however, to see if you're right and it narrows the game unfairly...
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
All in all...
I feel the 5 yard option still has it's place and the wording of the amended rule leaves alittle to be desired...
I just don't think you can "okay" the grabbing of a face mask...
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
I do not "okay " it. I just think the hand in the face of the qb unless he graps, twists, or pulls should not be called.
gatorhippy
· 1 year ago
Reread the first sentence of the rule amendment...
"There is no longer a foul if any player grabs an opponent’s face mask without pulling, twisting, or turning it.
That in itsef says it all...
A hand grabbing the mask is not a foul...
So apparently you don't agree with it and didn't even know it...
;-]
Tigers318
· 1 year ago
If you grap it hard enough it is going to twist or you would pull it.
Regan
· 1 year ago
My absolute favorite penalty is the 'Flagrant Violation of the Halo'.
I don't even know what they've PC'ed it down to now as terms go, but absolutely nothing is as awesome to watch...so long as the guy can walk afterwards... >:-)
jd
· 1 year ago
I will admit that I am shocked there are not more injuries facemasking. Hence overreaction on incidental has been the case
Carkenfarker
· 1 year ago
Good call by the NCAA. Now, about that stupid "blocking in the back rule".
Tom_Blogical
· 1 year ago
I agree with the rule change. I don't have any problem with someone grabbing a facemask without pulling, twisting, or turning it, because no injury can occur here.
I believe the helmet-to-helmet foul should be completely junked. If it's obvious someone is using their helmet for a weapon, the team committing the foul needs to be penalized 15 yards, automatic first down for the opposing team, and the player in question automatically kicked off the field. There is nothing a player can do about their helmet accidentally hitting the helmet of the player they're tackling. Why penalize them for it? (That's a rhetorical question--I'm not asking someone to try and convince me otherwise).
The cut block (one-on-one, not the dirty two-on-one high/low crap) is a good block if you execute it properly. The block is supposed to be used above the knees. That's how I was taught to use it, anyway--and it was burned into my brain to keep it there or it was a cheap shot--I had a great coach. Anyone using it at knee level or lower should be penalized. Yeah, I know. That leaves a lot open to interpretation, but I think this would be a very obvious one to call.
RazzMaTazz
· 1 year ago
If I were a coach I'd make all of my players wear wrap-around face masks... and not just the kind that wraps around the entire face, but ones that wraps around the entire body like bell-shaped cage. If anybody tried to tackle one of my players, bing, 15 yard penalty!
SCARLET & GREY
· 1 year ago
Basically I agree with BLEED CRIMSON the players....& ( you wouldnt understand this unless you've played FOOTBALL .) will take advantage of this rule. When i played ,if my fingers happened to slip thru the face mask..I'd immediately jerk them out causing no hindrance but still hoping a ref didn't catch it. after all accidents will happen. No harm no foul. BUT IF YOU CLENCH your fingers once they've entered the facemask cage...THATS INTENT & based on the severity ...5 or 15. Back to a judgement call by the ref ....& after all thats what they do p.s. BLEED CRIMSON ? Billy Hack?
All Comments
And bring back cleats with real metal spikes. Oh wait. That was baseball. My bad...
A play can be altered or a player inhibited by a hand on the facemask even without "pulling, twisting or turning" it...
Perhaps rewording it to specify the altering of game play due to the hand on the facemask...
"the altering of game play due to the hand on the facemask"...
I'm talking about the infraction altering the outcome of the single play that it occurs on...
Not the course of the game itself...
For example, a QB is blitzed and as he is moving to avoid the defender a hand is placed on his facemask that doesn't invlove a "pulling, twisting or turning" of his hat but impedes his vision to where he can't see an open receiver...
In the interpretation of the wording of the rule, this would receive no flag...
But it is most certainly an action that has altered the potential outcome of the play....
Essentially the wording opens up players to being able to use their hands on a face mask in a vision imparing manner thus gaining an unfair advantage, IMHO...
The way this rule has been worded a player can essentailly faceguard (an NCAA no-no) as long as they place ahand on the facemask...
Well say a 5'9 QB and a 6'7 DT, that would aslo affect the QB's vision, so what now we are going to band people taller than the QB.
Actually, yes but by being able to legally have hand come in contact with the mask it essentially allows, IMO encourages, the defender to lead with the hand into the face mask while closing on the QB who now has lost a second or two of extra release time because of allowable facemask contact...
There is a large difference in gaining advantage because of actual body size and essentially legalizing faceguarding through contact with the headgear...
Well anyway I like this rule change.
As well as penalizing the defender a full fifteen yards for that same "incidental" contact you are speaking of if the QB's head is even just slightly moved by the contact where as before the incidental conct would have only resulted in a 5 yard penalty...
But the way that it is worded the above scenario WOULD result in a penalty...
And with the incedental 5 yarder judgement c all being removed, it results in a 15 yarder instead...
Regardless of whether if affected the outcome of the play or not...
Again, it's simply the wording that will cause the problem, IMO...
But try to come in contact with a facemask moving full speed and see if the guy's head doesn't move...
Incidental or not, your team has just recieved a15 yard penalty rather than the five they would have received last season...
THAT can change the outcome of the entire game...
If you make contact with a guy at full speed, regardless if you touch his facemask, his head is probably going to move.
Regardless of intent...
The way it's worded you can grab a facemask essentially as long as the head doesn't move...
If it does you recieve a 15 yard penalty regardless of intent or outcome...
the goal of the guy grapping the face mask is to get the tackle.
In desperation he might grap the mask, then he should get called for a 15.
But if he does the thing with the qb from earlier the i do not think he should get called at all.
You see O lineman receive facemask penalties as well as other blockers receive them when a hand inadvertantly jams up into the facemask...
A DL being shoved to to the outside of a QB still attempts to get a hand in just block the passer's view and can easily result in inadvertant contact and gripping of the mask which when continually pushed by the blocker can result in "pulling, twisting or turning" of said QB's head...
I watched the LSU/Auburn replay again last night, and its the most disgusting thing I've seen on a football field since that Miami "soldier" was swinging his helmet around during Coker's last season...
why?
Before, the referees handed out the 5 yarder unless it was blatantly obvious that the guy was brought to the ground by the facemask.
Nowww, every single time a player's facemask is touched, they will huddle up and there's a 50% chance your team will be slapped with a 15 yarder.
Basically what i'm saying is this - this year, many of the calls that would've been 5 yards last year, will now be 15 yards.
especially if you're a visiting team in the SEC, the home field advantage will get the visiting team the 15-yarder every time over a no call. where last year it would've been just 5 yards.
do yall get my drift?
its kinda hard to put what im saying in words.
Essentially, the refs had 3 options: Not Call, Call (incidental - 5 yds), and Call (flagrant-15 yds).
Now they have only two - Not Call, or Call (flagrant-15 yds).
I understand the idea and am willing to give it a shot for a year to see how it works out. We'll need to watch, however, to see if you're right and it narrows the game unfairly...
I feel the 5 yard option still has it's place and the wording of the amended rule leaves alittle to be desired...
I just don't think you can "okay" the grabbing of a face mask...
"There is no longer a foul if any player grabs an opponent’s face mask without pulling, twisting, or turning it.
That in itsef says it all...
A hand grabbing the mask is not a foul...
So apparently you don't agree with it and didn't even know it...
;-]
I don't even know what they've PC'ed it down to now as terms go, but absolutely nothing is as awesome to watch...so long as the guy can walk afterwards... >:-)
I believe the helmet-to-helmet foul should be completely junked. If it's obvious someone is using their helmet for a weapon, the team committing the foul needs to be penalized 15 yards, automatic first down for the opposing team, and the player in question automatically kicked off the field. There is nothing a player can do about their helmet accidentally hitting the helmet of the player they're tackling. Why penalize them for it? (That's a rhetorical question--I'm not asking someone to try and convince me otherwise).
The cut block (one-on-one, not the dirty two-on-one high/low crap) is a good block if you execute it properly. The block is supposed to be used above the knees. That's how I was taught to use it, anyway--and it was burned into my brain to keep it there or it was a cheap shot--I had a great coach. Anyone using it at knee level or lower should be penalized. Yeah, I know. That leaves a lot open to interpretation, but I think this would be a very obvious one to call.
p.s. BLEED CRIMSON ? Billy Hack?