Dare I say we see the intentional PI enter its heyday now? <shudder thingy>

We just might. Make the officials call it.

Peace

I don't believe they'll go up significantly since most DPI's will still result in an AFD. Obviously the only time they won't is if the LTG is more than 15 yards or half the distance leaves them short or they are in a goal-to-go situation. I think any increase will come in those goal-to-go situation where a defender realizes he either gives up the TD or commits PI (especially on 3rd or 4th down). They'll get to replay the down but at least they'll have another chance to stop them. Even if you called intentional PI the down would still be replayed and you would only add another half the distance.

I do not like this change at all and hope it is still changed in editorial review.

I am not saying they will go up significantly, but I could see a coach or two teaching to foul when the down and distance is over 15 yards. And certainly do it in situations where the yardage is going to be a non-factor or even when the game is near the end. And we may actually see some situations where the intentional portion of that rule will be in play because HS kids often do not execute doing things on purpose without making it look like it was on purpose.

Peace

I would if I were a coach.

If the defense persists, when would 10-9-2 come into effect?

Law of unintended consequenses.

You mean they'll result in a first down. By rule, starting next year, they will NOT result in an AFD.

I dunno. I guess I expect DPI to be a more common tactic on 3rd-and-a-mile. No flag, D wins. Flag, it's still 3rd and long. Why wouldn't teams coach this?

"Don't let him catch it!"

It was happening anyway. An official's TO was used to get a sub in the game, same as an injury (or faked injury).

They will coach it. We were coached it...since it's not a spot foul if you're going to give up a TD, tackle the receiver, good coaching IMO

But overall it favors the offense. 15 yds. will usually produce a 1st down anyway, and if I'm 2nd & 16, I'd rather repeat the down and get 2nd & 1. Where it'll mostly matter is against the defense in a half-the-distance enforcement -- which actually is where you needed the AFD the most.

This will likely be a major issue around the goal line. No doubt.

Maybe in a yr. or 2 they'll add a special enforcement near B's end zone.

In Fed's football rules committee archives, in the 1940s (or maybe it was the late '30s) the sec'y or chairman wrote that he thought NCAA's failure to automatically award a TD on DPI in B's end zone was outdated, owing to a time when TDs had been scarcer, and advocated and expected Fed to make it a TD. That was one of the changes that was never adopted.

My understanding is that the loss of the AFD provision was a compromise to get the LOD out of the enforcement. I suspect that AFD will be reinstated in a couple of years after some rules committee members have rotated off.

+1

4th and goal at the 9. Team will teach if you get beat, interfere with the player. The worst than can happen is 4th and goal at the 2 1/4.

Bad move by the Rules Committee :mad:

I'm really surprised by this number, especially if Texas isn't included.