Jump to content

New Roughing the Passer Rule


Auburn4Winners

Recommended Posts

Brett McMurphy of ESPN just tweeted that the NCAA has approved a new 15-yard roughing the passer rule when the defender hits the QB below the knee on passing downs.. anybody else heard anything about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites





It's not completely official yet. Still has to be approved by another committee:

PROPOSED RULES CHANGE

The Rules Committee approved the following recommendation for a rules change on

March 5, 2014. It awaits approval by PROP.

Rule 9-1-9, Roughing the Passer (FR-90)

Low hits on passers

Add new paragraph b.

(The current article becomes paragraph a.)

“When an offensive player is in a passing posture with one or both feet on the ground,

no defensive player rushing unabated shall hit him forcibly at the knee area or below.

The defensive player also may not initiate a roll or lunge and forcibly hit this opponent

in the knee area or below.

[Exceptions. (1) It is not a foul if the offensive player is a runner not in a passing posture, either inside or outside the tackle box. (2) It is not a foul

if the defender grabs or wraps this opponent in an attempt to make a conventional tackle. (3) It is not a foul if the defender is not rushing unabated or is blocked or fouled into this opponent.]”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of hate these super specific rules. That is so much for a ref to have to try to process at high speed. Process whether he hit below the knees, easy... then throwing in all of the other variables to determine if it's a penalty, totally not easy. Then you end up with actual infractions not getting called or non-infractions getting called.

There should be a set guideline with NCAA rules that if they are miss-called more than 40% of the time, they are immediately removed from the rules. Of course, then Alabama would single-handedly get holding removed from the rule book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, it doesn't say a pass has to be thrown. If a QB is rolling out (with the ball at his chest in a passing position) and a defensive player dives and grabs his legs, is that now a penalty? Or is that covered by exception #2? I'd like more explanation on the "conventional tackle."

If done correctly, I think this rule could be okay. I understand not wanting players to take shots at QB's legs, but I agree there will be some bumps in the road with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll see how they call it. I don't recall seeing too many unblocked pass rushing players diving at QBs feet when they have a chance to get a sack. But it would be bad if they call it on the DL while they are fighting low through blocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see some examples of what they say is and is not a foul under the new rule. One play that comes to mind is 2010 Georgia game when Fairley hit Murray low. I know a lot of UGA fans were (and still are) butt-hurt over that play, but would that be interpreted as "unabated" under the new rule, or is that covered under the "blocked into" exception? We won't know how they are going to interpret the rule until they provide some guidance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historically, "roughing" is an after the fact call. The passer can only be roughed after the ball leaves his hand. The kicker can only be roughed if the ball is kicked and not blocked.

This change would be a first, in that it penalizes a sack of a QB who still possesses the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is going to happen over the next 10 years will be as follows:

1. Every penalty called will be under review...period..no exceptions.

2. Only designated defenders can rush the passer.

3. No more than 3 defenders can rush the passer.

4. There will be only 3 defensive linemen in any defensive scheme

5. If any college team finishes in the top 10 nationally on defense, they can only have 10 defensive players on the field at any time of the game for that entire season.

Yep....you heard it first here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hits low are a direct result of the rules about hitting above the shoulders. That's why we have seen more leg injuries not only on QBs but also on WRs. Now they want to take that off the table and make the target smaller and smaller. Add in the OL non-holding calls and the no hands call in the secondary and soon we can just have the defenses stand in one place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hits low are a direct result of the rules about hitting above the shoulders. That's why we have seen more leg injuries not only on QBs but also on WRs. Now they want to take that off the table and make the target smaller and smaller. Add in the OL non-holding calls and the no hands call in the secondary and soon we can just have the defenses stand in one place.

Likely so..but from my observation, most un-blocked rushers go for the upper body hoping to knock the ball loose. Can't see how a tackler could cause a fumble going low and questionable plays i can recall that had low tackles (like Nick F) came when the defender was already on the ground. But as noted, more grist for the replay mill.....a very detailed rule and will be hard to call properly so replay will often be needed IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hits low are a direct result of the rules about hitting above the shoulders. That's why we have seen more leg injuries not only on QBs but also on WRs. Now they want to take that off the table and make the target smaller and smaller. Add in the OL non-holding calls and the no hands call in the secondary and soon we can just have the defenses stand in one place.

Likely so..but from my observation, most un-blocked rushers go for the upper body hoping to knock the ball loose. Can't see how a tackler could cause a fumble going low and questionable plays i can recall that had low tackles (like Nick F) came when the defender was already on the ground. But as noted, more grist for the replay mill.....a very detailed rule and will be hard to call properly so replay will often be needed IMO.

But can this call be reviewable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

before long it will be two hand touch on the quarterbacks at all times. this is a rough game. tough titty if the QB gets hit. it's part of the game. Good grief!!! Man up!!!

That said, given the condition of Joe Namath's knees, and the target they were so many years ago, I'm surprised it has taken this many years for something like this to come up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hits low are a direct result of the rules about hitting above the shoulders. That's why we have seen more leg injuries not only on QBs but also on WRs. Now they want to take that off the table and make the target smaller and smaller. Add in the OL non-holding calls and the no hands call in the secondary and soon we can just have the defenses stand in one place.

Likely so..but from my observation, most un-blocked rushers go for the upper body hoping to knock the ball loose. Can't see how a tackler could cause a fumble going low and questionable plays i can recall that had low tackles (like Nick F) came when the defender was already on the ground. But as noted, more grist for the replay mill.....a very detailed rule and will be hard to call properly so replay will often be needed IMO.

It's not the un-blocked rushers that would do this. It's the rushers that are being partially blocked and off balance that will grab at anything they can. That use to be called football.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be many times that a defensive Ayer may be falling down while trying to get to the quarterback and being him down by tripping him up or hiring him below the knees with their hands while their momentum is being carried towards the ground. I expect to see a lot of calls of this new rule that are not protecting what the rule is really meant to protect, if in fact it does pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can a defender on the ground grab the passer by the foot?

Good question, but my guess is that is OK. I bet this will mainly be called with a guy dives at the knees or doesn't control they're body and contacts the knee or below after the ball has been thrown (kind of like the obligation of controlling one's body after a shot in basketball). Just my guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can a defender on the ground grab the passer by the foot?

Good question, but my guess is that is OK. I bet this will mainly be called with a guy dives at the knees or doesn't control they're body and contacts the knee or below after the ball has been thrown (kind of like the obligation of controlling one's body after a shot in basketball). Just my guess.

I think the point of this rule is to protect the QB before the ball is thrown too. Hitting him after the ball is gone was already a foul.

The NFL adopted this rule (known as the Brady rule) in 2009 because of the injury that sidelined Tom Brady for the 2008 season. It will be approved by the PROP for the NCAA.

In part because of the season-ending left knee injury that Brady suffered in the Patriots' 2008 season opener against the Chiefs, the league's Competition Committee adopted a clarification of the current rule on hits to a quarterback in the knee area or below. The clarification specifically prohibits a defender on the ground who hasn't been blocked or fouled directly into the quarterback from lunging or diving at the quarterback's lower legs. Brady tore his left ACL and left MCL in the first quarter of the Patriots' 17-10 win over the Chiefs Sept. 7. As Brady stepped into a 28-yard completion to Randy Moss, Chiefs safety Bernard Pollard made a desperation dive into Brady's left knee after he had been blocked to the ground just short of Brady by running back Sammy Morris. Pollard was not flagged or fined for the hit. Under the revised rule, a play like his would be penalized, according to Titans coach Jeff Fisher and Falcons president Rich McKay, co-chairmen of the committee.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No question that this rule is going to be approved in my opinion. And like 84 points out the NFL has had this rule in place for a few years now. I don't think this is going to be a big deal but thats just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This idea behind this rule makes sense IMO but as written, it doesn't give the refs (or DCs) much guidance as it could with undefined (?) terms like "passing posture" and "unabated". Understanding reffing's some art to go with the science (I've been out of it a while but worked a decade of FL high school and a little MEAC college) it will be interesting to see if this rule passes and if so, the final language and rule implementation comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This idea behind this rule makes sense IMO but as written, it doesn't give the refs (or DCs) much guidance as it could with undefined (?) terms like "passing posture" and "unabated". Understanding reffing's some art to go with the science (I've been out of it a while but worked a decade of FL high school and a little MEAC college) it will be interesting to see if this rule passes and if so, the final language and rule implementation comments.

Zero chance it doesn't pass, IMO. My guess is they will take their cue on enforcement from the NFL. I haven't watched enough pro games to see this called, but I imagine there is plenty of film on penalties that were called along with the League's interpretation of any that should not have been called and non-calls that should have been made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHY can't they just line up and play football--without these nitpicking rules??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...