Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Packers President Discusses Potential NFL Rule Changes

By Category

Packers President Discusses Potential NFL Rule Changes

As part of his monthly column at the Green Bay Packers official website, team president Mark Murphy let readers know some of the proposed NFL rule changes that were discussed by the league's Competition Committee at the NFL Combine last week.

Nothing will become official until the annual Owners Meetings in late March, but Murphy said the league is looking into the following:

  • Blocks: chop, roll, cut, peel-back
  • Protecting quarterbacks running the read-option while in the pocket
  • Low hits on defenseless players
  • Extra points
  • Playoff expansion
  • Instant replay system


  • Like Like
  • 341 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (13) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Phatgzus's picture

How I'd like to see it shake out:
Hell no
Hell no
Hell no

That said the only things I have a significant doubt will be approved are Replay and running QBs.

Uncle Louie's picture

I read the NFL is talking about changing the extra point in preseason. The line of scrimmage would be the 25 yard line and the kick would be 42 yards. The conversion rate for 42 yard field goals was 83% last season. Would definetly add some spice to the extra point.

4thand1's picture

They should change commissioners.

ray nichkee's picture

If they want a new commissoner, who the hell would do that job for only 44 million.

Evan's picture

This Peter King led PAT crusade just baffles me. Change for change's sake.

Calabasa's picture

I like the "Randall Cobb rule." As he said, they're pro athletes who can control their bodies with the best of them. They're hitting low to make a point and it's BS.

RC Packer Fan's picture

I would love to see the replay system redone.
I really wish the refs on the field wouldn't even be involved in the replay. I wish they would either add an official upstairs that pages down to the head official, or something like that.

I would also like to be able to review penalty's and pretty much just about everything on every play. I hate when a team can't review a play because according to the rule its none reviewable. To me that is just dumb.

There are so many momentum/game changing penalty's in a game that can really have an effect on the game. Why can't those plays be reviewed?

Its time for the instant replay system to be updated.

L's picture


This (instant replay) is the only thing on the list that I feel really needs to be address; although, maybe certain (so-called "dirty") types of chop, roll, cut, and peel-back blocks could be clarified and made illegal verses legal types, but I don't think they should make all of these types of blocks outright illegal as they're pretty important to the game in many regards.

L's picture

On a side note: If the NFL expands the replay system as indicated above by RC I'd also like to see the NFL bring back the two types of unnecessary roughness penalties - the intentional and unintentional - and give clear indications as to how they differ. One would assess a 15 yard penalty while the other a 5 yard penalty just like they use to.

Stroh's picture

Yeah lets make the ref's job more complicated. As if its not too complicated already. Is there a stardard for saying something is intentional and something is not, that's NOT totally subjective?

IMO make the ref's job easier, not more complicated.

L's picture

If all penalties are considered viable instant replay candidates and there's a dedicated official upstairs whose sole job is to monitor these types of instances I think it may not be as complicated as it use to be or potentially would be, but yes there's rarely such a thing as a totally non-subjective nor easy call in football; however, ensuring calls are made "right" and given proper weighted penalties are both quite important aspects to the game IMO and is why I think if the replay system was streamlined better and removed as a challenge system by coaches but instead handled entirely by the refs for proper calls on the fly then I think variable weighted penalties makes sense.

I mentioned Unnecessary Roughness, but I'm actually referring to calls consisting of holding penalties, face mask calls, helmet-to-helmet collisions, and roughing the passer in reference to calls that potentially warrant an extreme case and lesser or gray area case; I should have been more clear. I think there are differing levels of penalty in regards to each of these.

Holding penalties can vary greatly obviously as football is a game of contact and under this premise is where I think perhaps a 5 yard penalty could be introduced to go along with the 10 yard penalty depending on the hold being called.

Grabbing a face mask is one thing, but ripping on it and twisting it in order to bring a player down is quite different than someone grabbing one within the heat of the moment and immediately letting go.

I also think that players, especially for the defensive players, who are involved with attempted clean tackles but due to the other player making their own attempt for impact, avoidance or evasion end up making helmet-to-helmet contact is not the same thing as an offensive player who's attempting to spear a defensive player or a defensive player who appears to outright lead with his helmet in an attempt to land a big blow to another player.

Lastly, I think roughing the passer can get pretty nit-picky as to what constitutes receiving the penalty. It's suppose to be that a defender is penalized if he hits the passer having taken two or more steps after the ball leaves the passer's hand, or if the passer is hit above the shoulders, or if the passer is targeted using the crown of the helmet; however, in regards to being hit above the shoulders and being targeted by the helmet can be caused by the last second movements of avoidance by the QB himself and in those cases I think the penalty should either be diminished some or not enacted at all.

ray nichkee's picture

I think the refs need to be held to a higher standard for what they get paid and the time they spend. Get rid of these doctors and lawyers by week/ refs on Sunday and make them full time employees. Most of us could live a full year on what they make for a few games. With the technology we have there is no excuse for these bad calls happening and the game going on as is. I have no problem with a separate review crew off the field to make a few calls as long as the game can still flow and not make it much longer.

LAS VEGAS-TOM's picture

I thought I heard recently, that the Play Under Review was going to be taken away from the Refs on the field completely, & given to a Team of (?) in New York somewhere, who will Rule on all plays under review. This was suppose to happen, or maybe proposed to happen by the 2016 season. Anyone else heard this?

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "