Proposed new rules

[Rastak]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!

Barry was great. But I don't want everyone simply doing the same thing. There would be no Lambeau Leap if that was the case. I almost can't believe that little ritual has survived.

That should also be illegal but as always the Packers get to do what they want, the rules don't apply.......:^)

[pbmax]

That should also be illegal but as always the Packers get to do what they want, the rules don't apply.......:^)

I think the succession of pretty respectable players involved (White, Butler and Brooks) helped. Seemed quaint and goofy, not a taunt, an actual celebration.

If the Packers sign a big enough showboat at RB or WR who did something else with it, I think the League would ban the whole thing in a second.

[MadScientist]

They should just outlaw blocks below the knees. Easy to call. Techniques already exist to allow Offense to adjust. This is just dithering, though possibly a positive step: NFL considering additional protection for defensive players’ knees

Offensive linemen could adjust, but what about RB's in pass protection? When you are giving up 50+ pounds and the other guy has a head of steam, going low is the only way. If they ban hits below the knee unless the blocker is in front of the guy, it would take care of the worst problems, basically end the cut blocks from the offensive linemen.

[Guiness]

Then I will trade you the slam dunk for the fun bunch and Chad Johnson putting the football with a pylon.

You mean Occocino, the soon-to-be Alouette receiver?

https://www.torontosun.com/2014/03/20/ochocinco-added-to-montreal-alouettes-negotiation-list

[smuggler]

Offensive linemen could adjust, but what about RB's in pass protection? When you are giving up 50+ pounds and the other guy has a head of steam, going low is the only way. If they ban hits below the knee unless the blocker is in front of the guy, it would take care of the worst problems, basically end the cut blocks from the offensive linemen.

Nah, I like the proposed rule without conditions. It would bring back fullbacks, maybe!

[Fritz]

I think the succession of pretty respectable players involved (White, Butler and Brooks) helped. Seemed quaint and goofy, not a taunt, an actual celebration.

If the Packers sign a big enough showboat at RB or WR who did something else with it, I think the League would ban the whole thing in a second.

This is the essence of it, for me. If it's celebratory, it's okay. But if it's taunting, or if it's merely self-congratulatory, then it's stupid and the player should be kicked out of the game for an entire quarter.

This "look at me" shit is for the birds.

[Joemailman]

This is the essence of it, for me. If it's celebratory, it's okay. But if it's taunting, or if it's merely self-congratulatory, then it's stupid and the player should be kicked out of the game for an entire quarter.

This "look at me" shit is for the birds.

I agree with you on the taunting part. But how do you differentiate between celebratory and self-congratulatory?

[pbmax]

Possible expansion of Game Day roster for any games not on Sunday or Monday, excluding the first week of the season. From 46 to 49 actives:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/23/nfl-may-use-bigger-active-rosters-for-thursday-games/

[Pugger]

I saw the proposals on the Packers' web site and one of them was about increasing the number of players you can dress for game days to 49 from 46. That's a start but IMO if a player is on your 53 man roster then allow him to suit up him unless he's injured.

The other is eliminating over time in the preseason and I'm all for that.

[red]

That should also be illegal but as always the Packers get to do what they want, the rules don't apply.......:^)

yeah, i'm really surprised the leap is still allowed. it delays the game, and put the player and fans in harms way

plus for me, the novelty has worn off. it was special the first 1 or 200 times i saw it

[red]

I saw the proposals on the Packers' web site and one of them was about increasing the number of players you can dress for game days to 49 from 46. That's a start but IMO if a player is on your 53 man roster then allow him to suit up him unless he's injured.

The other is eliminating over time in the preseason and I'm all for that.

yeah, it makes no sense at all that you can have 53 guys on the roster but only 46 of them can dress and play

the only thing i can think of is that it allows for injured players to remain on the team. if you did allow all 53 to dress and play, then you would have to come up with some kind of short term IR, where any number of guys can go on and come off of IR on a week to week basis

[pbmax]

This celebration, should be used, in a Packer preseason game after a score:

[mraynrand]

^^^^ when you play a sport where you only score once every 42 days, you should get to celebrate any way you want.

[Fritz]

I say the Packers hide a few of the opposing team's helmets behind their bench. Then, when the Pack scores, the guy who scores runs to the bench, grabs the opposing team's helmet, puts it against his crotch, and humps it.

That's entertainment, right there.

[red]

I say the Packers hide a few of the opposing team's helmets behind their bench. Then, when the Pack scores, the guy who scores runs to the bench, grabs the opposing team's helmet, puts it against his crotch, and humps it.

That's entertainment, right there.

my guess is goddell and the NFL would frown upon "skull fucking" as a td celebration