If you want to talk ASUN smack or ramble ad nauseum about your favorite pro or major college teams, this is the place to let it rip.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

By Rocketfan
Registration Days Posts
#168504
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- NFL owners concluded their annual meeting owners with quick passages of several proposals and by tabling the re-seeding idea for the playoffs.

Without the necessary 24 votes to pass a re-seeding plan to give wild-card teams the chance to host playoff games, the Competition Committee tabled the concept to a later meeting, most likely May.

Among the proposals that were passed:

• A recommendation to eliminate force-out decisions on pass completions near the sidelines was approved. Now, officials will only have to decide whether a receiver landed in bounds or not. The intended result is more consistency.

• The "Phil Dawson field goal rule" change passed. Now, certain field goals can be reviewed by instant replay, including kicks that bounce off the uprights. Under the previous system, no field goals could be replayed.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3325273
By LUconn
Registration Days Posts
#168508
Rocketfan wrote:
• A recommendation to eliminate force-out decisions on pass completions near the sidelines was approved. Now, officials will only have to decide whether a receiver landed in bounds or not. The intended result is more consistency.

http://www.flamefans.com/forums/viewtop ... ight=force


When you guys go to sleep at night, do you thank God that you know me? I make a suggestion and it is so, mere months later.
By thesportscritic
Registration Days Posts
#168510
LUconn wrote:
Rocketfan wrote:
• A recommendation to eliminate force-out decisions on pass completions near the sidelines was approved. Now, officials will only have to decide whether a receiver landed in bounds or not. The intended result is more consistency.

http://www.flamefans.com/forums/viewtop ... ight=force


When you guys go to sleep at night, do you thank God that you know me? I make a suggestion and it is so, mere months later.
no not really :P
User avatar
By jcmanson
Registration Days Posts
#168524
I love how that topic ended :D
By LUconn
Registration Days Posts
#168526
I'm one of those people where I'd have to tragically die before I was appreciated. My greatness is so subtle that you only notice the lack of it, absent of my presence.
User avatar
By RagingTireFire
Registration Days Posts
#168527
So get to dying already.

Note: I should probably add the :wink: so Smooth doesn't ban me.
User avatar
By jcmanson
Registration Days Posts
#168543
Smooth has no power
By TDDance234
Registration Days Posts
#168556
I wish they would have either passed the hair rule or made the hair a part of the jersey, therefore, allowing them to be tackled by it. If you want to look like a fairy, great, just be prepared to get it ripped off by a 350lb. lineman.
By LUconn
Registration Days Posts
#168560
I was under the impression that you're more than welcome to take a player down by their hair. I thought it was generally understood that if you had long hair you were taking your chances.
By blwall1416
Registration Days Posts
#168569
LUconn wrote:I was under the impression that you're more than welcome to take a player down by their hair. I thought it was generally understood that if you had long hair you were taking your chances.
Regardless of what the rulebook might say, this would be an "understood rule." In the semi-pro league I played in, we played by NFL rules. One of the guys on our team had really long dreads. Only a few times did any opponent try to pull his hair. Some sneaky, yet painful, retaliation would soon follow & everyone quickly learned NOT to mess with that guy's hair...whether it was allowed or not.
By Rocketfan
Registration Days Posts
#168588
LUconn wrote:I was under the impression that you're more than welcome to take a player down by their hair. I thought it was generally understood that if you had long hair you were taking your chances.
you are allowed to tackle by the hair there is no rule against it.
By TylerBakersGonnaBGreat
Registration Days Posts
#168610
Rocketfan wrote:
LUconn wrote:I was under the impression that you're more than welcome to take a player down by their hair. I thought it was generally understood that if you had long hair you were taking your chances.
you are allowed to tackle by the hair there is no rule against it.

Thats what She said
User avatar
By JDUB
Registration Days Posts
#168636
good one
User avatar
By RubberMallet
Registration Days Posts
#168676
blwall1416 wrote:
LUconn wrote:I was under the impression that you're more than welcome to take a player down by their hair. I thought it was generally understood that if you had long hair you were taking your chances.
Regardless of what the rulebook might say, this would be an "understood rule." In the semi-pro league I played in, we played by NFL rules. One of the guys on our team had really long dreads. Only a few times did any opponent try to pull his hair. Some sneaky, yet painful, retaliation would soon follow & everyone quickly learned NOT to mess with that guy's hair...whether it was allowed or not.
sorry this is football....there is no understood rule....not making a tackle could result in a td which could result in you not being on the team anymore... you'll tackle someone anyway legal way you can..
By blwall1416
Registration Days Posts
#168766
RubberMallet wrote:sorry this is football....there is no understood rule....not making a tackle could result in a td which could result in you not being on the team anymore... you'll tackle someone anyway legal way you can..
Believe me....there are understood rules in football. The semi-pro league had guys from Arena Football, Canadian Football, European Football, College Football, & the NFL. But, it didn't take long to learn that just about all of them knew these "understood" rules. You choose not to follow them, you choose to face retaliation....guaranteed.
5 for 5 rule Meeting

Ohio just granted an injunction to 15 kids with mo[…]