NFL Rulebook: 2 Changes the NFL Needs to Make (And One They Already Have)

Almost every football columnist on Earth has rattled off a “10 Things Wrong With The NFL” post at some point in his career. I’m pretty sure that I’ve not only done it, but also been critical of those who have, but I’m taking a slightly different approach here. Instead of a laundry list of grievances, I’ve tried to build some constructive arguments for three rules changes that could easily be implemented in time for 2012.

The truth is that there are a lot of little things about football that just bug us, and they seem like easy things to fix. These proposals are actually issues with rules that were supposed to fix other issues, but actually created new issues in their place.

These three fixes would not only improve the game, but actually make officiating the game easier, and thereby making the entire experience better for everyone. You’re welcome in advance.

1. Get Rid of the K Ball

What if I told you that the NFL had an opportunity to increase scoring, reduce injuries on kickoffs AND improve the disposition of a certain segment of its labor force? And suppose I told you that the powers that be would be dead-set against investigating it? No, I’m not talking about banning Chad Henne from the league, though if you could get the paperwork started on that, I’d be all for it. No, I mean the dreaded “K Ball,” that hapless protocol from the Tagliabue Era that haunts kickers, punters and long-snappers to this very day.

You might know a thing about working in a high-pressure job, forced to work and create with inferior tools while the managers above you—who have no conceivable clue with regard to how you execute your craft—engage in daily sabotage of your work environment with tools and resources that aren’t up to the task. The NFL thought this was a great idea, and before the start of the 1999 season, made the decision to take away the kickers’ balls.

What's so funny?

The often-cited reason for the change was the interesting methods through which kickers and punters went about getting their balls game ready. Sticking a ball in the dryer, soaking it in hot water, or kneading one with a 100-lb weight loosens up the seams, making the ball’s surface flatter and easier to kick. Because...well, why would anyone want a kicker to be better at his job?

Quarterbacks have been allowed to use their own balls for home and away games since 2006, as the NFL’s Competition Committee cited “no competitive advantage or disadvantage” from the change. If the league’s quarterback’s can have their way, why can’t the kickers? Especially when jobs and games are on the line?

What makes the K Balls so miserable is that they arrive at the stadium directly from the manufacturer. When the rule was first implemented, the kickers and punters never saw these balls before the game, let alone had any chance to break them in. These balls have the potential to affect the outcomes of games, and not in a good way. Remember Tony Romo’s botched hold in the 2006 playoffs against the Seahawks? K Ball. And sure, it’s always fun to watch the Cowboys lose, but for a game to be determined by something other than the actual performance in the moment seems grossly unfair.

Have you ever handled a brand-new football? Right out of the box, those Wilson balls have a waxy finish on them, which makes them slick. The seams on the ball are quite stiff, and to say it’s unforgiving to the touch would be an understatement. The sport would be better served by giving kickers the best possible opportunity to succeed.

Even in Roger Goodell’s totalitarian NFL, the kickers could get their way. When the K Balls were first instituted in 1999, they remained in the referee’s care before game time. Last season, kickers were allowed a brief amount of time to clean and wipe the balls to their liking. That trend will likely continue this season, but we can do better. Just get rid of that damn K Ball altogether, and watch the field goals and touchbacks pile up.

2. Forbid Head Coaches from Calling Timeouts. 

This brings us to another rule change implemented before the 1999 season, but this is more of an unintended consequence of a good rule, which was the NFL’s re-implementation of instant replay.

Instead of reviewing questionable plays as they did from 1986 to 1992 (with non-HD equipment, mind you), the NFL gave head coaches the ability to challenge plays

(Bill Walsh often told a joke about how coaches feel about making judgements from the field. A coach gets married, and some of his friends ask him about his transition into a married man. The coach replies, “I don’t know. I haven’t seen the tape yet.” I guess that passes for humor in football circles.)

But in addition to getting the challenge buzzer (which was later changed to a red flag), the head coach also received another privilege: the ability to call timeouts for his team during the game. Before 1999, only players could do so, but now the coaches can stop a game to rally their troops at their own discretion.

And here came the unintended consequence: even though a team’s head coach lost the ability to challenge a play in the last two minutes of a half, he can still call timeouts, and so in 2007 we wound up with a gaggle of head coaches calling timeouts just nanoseconds before kickers would attempt game-winning field goals. The ball would split the uprights before we realized that the kick didn’t count, that the officials had blown the play dead and everyone would wonder what was the point of it all.

This practice has leveled off to some degree, partly because of the danger of giving kickers a free practice kick on the field, but it still injures the aesthetic of the game. The best solution is to prohibit coaches from calling timeouts during games, or at least in the last two minutes of a half. The coach has eleven other guys on the field with him. Surely one of them could be taught to make that little T with his hands.

3. Let Teams Dress and Play 3 Quarterbacks without Provisions [UPDATED]

 Page 113 of the NFL’s Official Playing Rules And Casebook is devoted entirely to the “Use of Third Quarterback.” Not to be dramatic here, but if you read it, you would hate life. Apparently, so did the NFL, who already made a change to the rule during the labor hubbub over the summer. 

The gist was that, in addition to dressing 45 players for each game, a team could designate a third quarterback to play in an emergency. Oh, and those 45 guys came out of a roster of 53 players that they already have, so they already had seven guys from each team that wouldn't play. Yeah, I didn’t get it, either.

But the only two ways that a third quarterback could have entered a game were (a) if the first two got hurt or (b) the game was in the fourth quarter. And then he had to report to the referee, and if it was his first play of the game, he couldn't even hold for an extra point.

This seems like a lot for a referee to monitor, and the NFL agreed. So they just gave each team 46 active roster spots for game days. Because what team would be collectively insane enough to dress three active quarterbacks under that old system? And how big of a competitive advantage is it if you have a Seneca Wallace-type who can play on third downs or special teams when you’ve already given up a roster spot for him?

The third quarterback rule epitomizes the one glaring issue with the NFL: its rulebook too closely resembles the IRS tax code, and is modified almost as frequently. If there weren’t layers upon layers of provisions and exceptions carved out for kickers, quarterbacks and coaches, the game would be more fair and easier for fans to enjoy. The NFL needs to continue cutting the fine print out of its rulebook, and then maybe guys like me can stop making these silly lists and get back to writing about, you know, football.