There are 181 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Should the NFL do away "the Gentlemen's agreement" on kneel down plays?

Should the NFL do away "the Gentlemen's agreement" on kneel down plays?

The QB should be able to kneel or drop but he should then have to be touched by a defensive player to end the play.
I think every team that plays the bucks this year should just ram it down their throats and embarrass them. If it was a blowout and the Giants kept trying to score, the bucs would be b***hing like Pete Carroll on steroids about how thats unsportsmanlike and you dont do that in the NFL blah blah blah.
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by saj4423:
Clock should stop on a kneel down. Teams should have to run a play.

I disgree 100%. The reason last drives for teams down and without timeouts is so exciting is because we know its the last drive. It adds an element of pressure, as well excitment to the closing of a game.

The only thing doing away with kneel downs would do is force teams to run the ball at the end of the game. Sure you may have that fumble and recovery once in a blue moon, But it makes that last drive less exciting because there is still an "opportunity" no mater how minute, to still get the ball back. Not only that but I could see it causing alot of drama and heated tempers at the end of games. Defenses being overly ambitious to try to get a strip, and injurys and fights at the end of games etc.


Right, the kneeldown to burn time is part of the chess game that is football. Not to understate the physical aspect of the game, but there is the strategy and gamesmanship of it as well (which a coach like JH fully gets whereas Singletary could not). It's not like teams leading at the beginning of the fourth quarter just start kneeling down to run time out, it pretty much only happens after the 2 minute warning when the other team is out of timeouts. The game has been fought and decided at that point, and the only thing left to be done is bring the game to its conclusion by running a dead play.

If we're going to decide that teams should have to be aggressive even if it is strategically unwise, why not just make it a rule that teams have to throw for the endzone every play?
  • vaden
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 3,010
I don't want any rules preventing kneeldowns, but I don't respect any "Gentleman's agreement" between coaches that involves anything other than commanding their players to give 100% on every damn play.
I totally disagree with any of the "kneel-down" foolishness, especially in a close game. If there is any chance another drive could win the game for the other team, then, play the game until the end of the clock. That 1:20 the offense can burn is plenty of time for defense to get the ball and execute a drive (and win the game) . Obviously that would not be the case in a lopsided game - in that case too bad so sad, you should have played better. But if it's a single possession game- blitz the pussie offense, get the ball, and go win. Just my .02
Originally posted by bloughmee:
I totally disagree with any of the "kneel-down" foolishness, especially in a close game. If there is any chance another drive could win the game for the other team, then, play the game until the end of the clock. That 1:20 the offense can burn is plenty of time for defense to get the ball and execute a drive (and win the game) . Obviously that would not be the case in a lopsided game - in that case too bad so sad, you should have played better. But if it's a single possession game- blitz the pussie offense, get the ball, and go win. Just my .02

thanks for necro'ing this thread. Holy hell.

I disagree. Everyone knows if a team coughs it up with 1:30 on the clock and theyre down the game is over.
[ Edited by xtm059 on Oct 14, 2013 at 3:28 PM ]