Annoying NFL Rules

As I was watching the football games this weekend, some of my big pet peeves with the NFL again came to the forefront.  There are some NFL rules that aren't just stupid, they don't make any sense.  Some are even downright unfair.

This, of course, happens every year.  And the NFL, by and large, has done a good job of addressing any rules and loopholes that need to be changed during the offseason.  For example, teams no longer need to kick the meaningless extra point if they score a touchdown on the final play of regulation.  Likewise, they were quick to close the loophole regarding intentional penalties that Mike Vrabel exploited in the playoffs last season.  And in the past, we've seen them address the tuck rule and the constantly-changing definition of what constitutes a catch.

That doesn't mean things are perfect, though.  Not by a long shot.  There are probably some other rules that I wouldn't mind seeing changed (or, at least, amended).  But these are the big ones that really stick out in my mind that I'd like to see changed sooner rather than later.

Touchbacks: A few years ago, they changed the rule on touchbacks.  Now the ball comes out to the 25 on kickoffs.  That would be fine if they hadn't kept it at coming out to the 20 on all other touchbacks.  Why?  There's absolutely no reason for them to be different!  What about a kickoff warrants an additional five yards that you don't get on a punt or turnover?  I know they're all about player safety and don't want kickoffs returned, which may have been the whole point.  But why is returning a punt OK then?  It doesn't make any sense!

There's obviously a very simple and logical solution to this problem.  Bring all touchbacks to the same place.  If it's the 25, great.  If it's the 20, that's fine too.  But pick one!  Because it makes absolutely no sense that you only need to go 75 yards after a kickoff, but 80 after a punt or turnover.

Fumbles out of the end zone: Speaking of turnovers, this rule is a little more obscure, but no less annoying.  If the offense fumbles and the ball goes out of bounds, they keep the ball at the spot where it went out.  But if they're going for a touchdown and fumble out of the end zone, it's a safety.  That also makes absolutely no sense to me.

Granted, this doesn't happen often enough for it to be something they're likely to worry about.  But it's still an annoying rule.  Especially since it really could just be an unlucky bounce.  The opponent shouldn't get points for that.  A holding penalty or the punter running out of the back of the end zone?  Absolutely!  It should just be a touchback, which is exactly what it would be if the defense fell on the fumble in the end zone.

Overtime: You already know my thoughts about the 10-minute overtime.  And the increased number of tie games in the NFL since they chopped that five minutes off isn't a coincidence.  It's a direct result of only giving them 10 minutes, which really isn't as much time as you think it is.  Especially since both teams are guaranteed a possession.

They need to go back to 15-minute overtimes.  Because 10 minutes really isn't enough time.  If the receiving team goes on a long drive and kicks a field goal, you're basically forcing the other team to run a two-minute drill.  Even then, they might only have time for a field goal, which would re-tie the game.  And, since there wouldn't be any time left, we'd be stuck with the ugly tie that nobody likes.  Meanwhile, if they get the full 15, there's no rush and there's more of a chance of having a winner and loser.

The 10-second run-off: Like the length of overtime, I've gone on and on about my dislike of the 10-second run-off.  I'm not against it per se, but there need to be qualifications.  Because too often the offense gets penalized with a 10-second run-off for something that wasn't even their fault.  If the ruling on the field is reversed on replay, the offense shouldn't have to pay for the officials' mistake!  Especially since (as I've seen happen) it could end up costing them the game (which it did for the Lions when they ruled the receiver down at the one instead of in the end zone with eight seconds left).

Yet again, there's a very simple solution to this one.  If they determine on replay that the ball was down in the field of play and the clock should've been running, no 10-second replay or requiring them to use a timeout to avoid it.  Instead, you start the clock immediately once the ball is spotted and ready for play.  That way the offense isn't penalized because of replay.

Helmet-to-helmet tackles: Hear me out on this one.  I have no issue with the automatic 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for obvious helmet-to-helmet tackles.  It's the ones that aren't obvious where I have a bit of a problem.  Because all the onus is put on the defender to avoid contact when sometimes he may not be able to avoid it.

If the defender's already in the air and ready to make a legal tackle, then the running back or receiver changes direction at the last second, what's he supposed to do?  I know the whole purpose of the rule is to prevent injuries, but if you're exposing the defender to injury if you're expecting him to change direction in midair like that.  My solution is simply to apply some common sense.  If it's an obvious foul, it's a 15-yard penalty.  No question.  If there's some gray area, though, don't immediately throw the flag.  Talk about it, maybe even look at it, then decide.  If the defender reasonably could've avoided contact, fine.  Throw the flag.  If not, don't tag him with the 15 yards.

Are any of these rules likely to be changed anytime soon?  Probably not!  Am I the only person bothered by them?  Perhaps!  But if they were to change one or all of them, it would definitely be an improvement over the current rule.