Isaac Curtis Rule - Your thoughts?

[Ilmater]

There's an article at ESPN - Text - b1tching about the rule and how they're expecting too much from CBs. Do you all agree?

My thoughts are simple: have you played NFL Blitz? It's impossible to throw passes in that game because this rule doesn't exist. As soon as I throw a pass, the person on the other team switches to the defender and knocks down the receiver. Stupid. Why would we want that in the NFL? No matter how much CBs complain, I think it's necessary.

 

[KLin]

I bet peyton manning or daunte culpepper will break the single season TD record.

 

[Mr N8]

Its a perfectly logical rule. I see no problem with it.

 

[RedRooster]

What you're talking in your videogame example is blatant pass interference. This rule is meant to get rid of the chippy picks and holds that occur that were neither legal or illegal.
Personally, I was getting sick of seeing all the crap that goes on in the secondary, especially when a prestige reciever gets doubled by a safety and a corner. I'm completely for the rule, it'll bring more offense and make the game even more exciting. Corner's should be tested on their footwork, speed, and ability to read the reciever, rather than just grab onto an arm or jersey and have the guy tow you through his route.

 

[Whisper]

Originally posted by: RedRooster
What you're talking in your videogame example is blatant pass interference. This rule is meant to get rid of the chippy picks and holds that occur that were neither legal or illegal.
Personally, I was getting sick of seeing all the crap that goes on in the secondary, especially when a prestige reciever gets doubled by a safety and a corner. I'm completely for the rule, it'll bring more offense and make the game even more exciting. Corner's should be tested on their footwork, speed, and ability to read the reciever, rather than just grab onto an arm or jersey and have the guy tow you through his route.

Agreed

 

[Ilmater]

OK, two people dislike the rule but only those agreeing with it have posted. I'd really like to hear what those who disagree think. Don't chicken out... POST!!!

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: RedRooster
What you're talking in your videogame example is blatant pass interference. This rule is meant to get rid of the chippy picks and holds that occur that were neither legal or illegal.

I see that you kind of agree with me, but I want to be clear that there's no difference between the two. If you totally knock down a receiver, it's the same as if you just grab his arm at the last second and yank him back. What's the WR supposed to do? He may as well be on the ground. I think those things got WAY out of hand and I'm glad to see the rule being enforced again. The Pats WOULD NOT have made it to the final game last year without Ty Law basicallly grabbing, pushing and mugging Marvin Harrison.

 

[Thraxen]

How strict is this rule? Contact is going to happen no matter what the rules state. Does incidental contact still apply?

[edit] They weren't allowed to impede progress after five yards anyway, so what does this rule change exactly?

[edit2] I just read article. So there is no new rule, they are just going to be enforcing the existing rule more strictly. I thought you talking about some new rule. Well, I'm fine with it unless they get too carried away. For example, I don't think putting a hand on a receiver should be a penalty. I hate cheap calls like that. As long as there is no grabbing or pushing, I see nothing wrong with minor contact. This is a contact sport.

 

[Kilrsat]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: RedRooster
What you're talking in your videogame example is blatant pass interference. This rule is meant to get rid of the chippy picks and holds that occur that were neither legal or illegal.

I see that you kind of agree with me, but I want to be clear that there's no difference between the two. If you totally knock down a receiver, it's the same as if you just grab his arm at the last second and yank him back. What's the WR supposed to do? He may as well be on the ground. I think those things got WAY out of hand and I'm glad to see the rule being enforced again. The Pats WOULD NOT have made it to the final game last year without Ty Law basicallly grabbing, pushing and mugging Marvin Harrison.

But on the other side of that you have people like Randy Moss who put both hands on a CB and shove him out of the way. If they want to clamp down on defenders putting their hands on receivers then the receivers shouldn't be allowed to touch the defender.

I think blatent arm bars, jersey grabs, shoves, etc. should be illegal by both offense and defense but the small hand checks when your head is turned and you're trying to play the ball should be overlooked. If you have two guys running and jumping and neither one is looking at the other you will have incidental contact and that's just part of the game.

 

[Nitemare]

I think it sucks. If I wanted to see 63-56 scores I would be watching arena football.

 

[Mo0o]

If the rule didn't exist then receivers would be out of a job

 

[RedRooster]

Originally posted by: Ilmater

Originally posted by: RedRooster
What you're talking in your videogame example is blatant pass interference. This rule is meant to get rid of the chippy picks and holds that occur that were neither legal or illegal.

I see that you kind of agree with me, but I want to be clear that there's no difference between the two. If you totally knock down a receiver, it's the same as if you just grab his arm at the last second and yank him back. What's the WR supposed to do? He may as well be on the ground. I think those things got WAY out of hand and I'm glad to see the rule being enforced again. The Pats WOULD NOT have made it to the final game last year without Ty Law basicallly grabbing, pushing and mugging Marvin Harrison.

Ya, you're right, it really is all illegal. It just didn't seem to be enforced if the ball was no where near the infraction. Now, it sounds like anything(non-incidental) will be called. I don't know how they'll change the referee positioning to account for everyone or what, I'd imagine there'll be less(possibly) line calls or something if there's less focus on stuff near scrimmage. Who knows, I just know I like the rule. Mainly cuz I'm a Colts diehard.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
If the rule didn't exist then receivers would be out of a job

Sort of like running backs are out of a job now?

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: KLin
I bet peyton manning or daunte culpepper will break the single season TD record.

Peyton now has 31 TD passes.