I hate touchback rules

[FlabLoser]

If the punt team touches the ball at the 10 and the ball rolls to the 5, it is down at the 10. But if the punt team touches the ball at the 10 and it rolls to the endzone, its a touchback.

So the play is over when the ball is touched at the 10 unless the play is not over and then its a touchback.

[Dawg61]

Fumbling and it hitting the pylon results in the defense getting the ball yet fumbling an inch before that and the offense retains the ball. That one is stupid too.

[smootness]

There's a pretty clear reason for this. It's so the punting team can't just keep hitting the ball backward while also keeping them from being able to just tap the ball while it's on it's way into the end zone and downing it at the 1.

[FlabLoser]

There's a pretty clear reason for this. It's so the punting team can't just keep hitting the ball backward while also keeping them from being able to just tap the ball while it's on it's way into the end zone and downing it at the 1.

That's not the point. The point is the ball should be down the first place it is touched. If it is touched at the 3, it shouldn't matter if it keeps rolling into the endzone or not - it ought to be down at the 3.

[smootness]

That's not the point. The point is the ball should be down the first place it is touched. If it is touched at the 3, it shouldn't matter if it keeps rolling into the endzone or not - it ought to be down at the 3.

That would make it far too easy for a team to down it deep. It would be much dumber than the current rule.

[FlabLoser]

If we don't want to make things to easy, then remove the break-the-plane rule. Make a guy put 2 feet in the endzone to get a TD.

^^^sarcasm


Rules just need to be consistent. If touching a ball stops the play, it should always stop the play.

Same thing with the heel-toe catch rule. If you drag a toe in bounds going forward, it is in bounds no matter where the heel or rest of the body lands. But if you're going backwards and drag a toe it is out of bounds because the heel lands out of bounds - that makes no sense.

[drunkernhelldawg]

It adds a lot more excitement to have the punt team make a solid play to get the reward. Just touching to down it is too easy.

[OldFatDog]

If we don't want to make things to easy, then remove the break-the-plane rule. Make a guy put 2 feet in the endzone to get a TD.

^^^sarcasm


Rules just need to be consistent. If touching a ball stops the play, it should always stop the play. Same thing with the heel-toe catch rule. If you drag a toe in bounds going forward, it is in bounds no matter where the heel or rest of the body lands. But if you're going backwards and drag a toe it is out of bounds because the heel lands out of bounds - that makes no sense.

The play isn't over when the punt team touches the ball at the 10. After the punting team touches the ball, the receiving team can attempt to pick the ball up and return it. If the returner touches the ball after the punt team touches the ball, the receiving team has the option of taking the first touch spot or the result of the completed play. So, theoretically, the punt team touches the ball at the 10 and the ball is still rolling, the receiver runs over in an attempts to grab the ball and take off, the ball takes a weird bounce and hits his knee. Punting team recovers at the 5. Receiving team has the choice to possess the ball at the 10 yard line. And, if this rule has been changed, then never mind.

[Belegal]

Also if kicking team touches punted ball at 10 but not downed, receiving team can advance ball and choose after the run where they want it - at the 10 or where run ended - unless penalty on receiving team after picking it up- if you fumble it, no harm - still can take ball at 10- that's why kicking team should pick it up

[BulldogBear]

Fumbling and it hitting the pylon results in the defense getting the ball yet fumbling an inch before that and the offense retains the ball. That one is stupid too.

Worst rule in all of college football IMO. Anywhere else on the field offense gets the ball at the point of fumble if it goes out of bounds going forward. Presumely the logic is that you should reduce the ability of the offense to profit from dropping the football. Sound logic. So why should it be any different if it goes into endzone and subsequently OOB. Makes no 17ing sense. Did the defense recover the ball? NO NO NO. That's just as logical as giving the defense the ball if you fumble at the 25 yd lines and it goes out at the 23.