The UFL is largely using ex-NFL coaches and ex-NFL players to build their new league.
One way the new league will differentiate is product is by deviating from some of the NFL's rules. Unlike the ill-conceived XFL, most of the ideas aren't stunts or gimmicks. Let's take a peek.
1. The biggest difference will come with overtime rules. Both teams will be allowed to possess the football, with true sudden death starting after one possession each.
In an offensive era, it's hard to argue with that one. It will create a number of new strategy decisions. Will teams be more likely to play for a touchdown?
2. The "Tuck Rule" has been buried, like the Oakland Raiders' 2001 championship hopes in the Foxborough snow. (Failing to convert a third-and-one didn't help, but that's another story.)
While the Tuck Rule isn't used that often, the UFL listed it's elimination first in their press release. It's a fun way to needle the NFL because most fans and players fundamentally disagree with the rule.
3. Instant Replay rulings will come from a replay official rather than the on-field referee.
4. A fumble into or out of the end zone will revert to the spot of the fumble when not recovered in the end zone. (That will only encourage DeSean Jackson to do this again.)
[Editor's note: Dennis Green, the Chair of the UFL's Competition Committee, was once burned by the NFL's version of the rule, which gives possession to the opposing team at its own 20, during an epic, back-and-forth 1996 regular-season game against the Packers. The Vikings eventually won the game.]
5. A quarterback can legally ground the ball inside or outside of the pocket when under duress. This could make the league more attractive and less dangerous for quarterbacks . . . like a certain former Falcon who might be barred from the NFL this season.
6. The cherry on the rule-changing Sundae: "Tasteful individual and/or group celebrations are permitted
ONLY in end zone and bench area." (It's the "boys just wanna have fun" rule.)
[Editor's note: There's no word on whether the UFL will allow in-game Tweeting. If they allow it, maybe they'll entice Chad Ochocinco to make the leap. And maybe that's a reason not to allow it.]
The UFL also promises increased access for fans through required wired-for-sound coaches and quarterbacks. Fans will only hear quarterback communication on a tape-delayed basis.
Overall, the rule changes aren't revolutionary. But maybe that's the point.
The UFL has tweaked some of the NFL's most unpopular rules, without changing the game.
UFL Changes Overtime, Abolishes Tuck Rule
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 8, 2009 3:10 PM ET
I like what they've done, unfortunately the UFL probably won't be around long enough to matter
That grounding rule is one that will draw some groans from fans, no doubt. But the rest are interesting, and it wouldn't surprise me to see the NFL co-opt some of them, just as they took bits and pieces from other pro football leagues in the past -- in particular, the overtime rule looks prime for snagging.
Florio says:
"The "Tuck Rule" has been buried, like the Oakland Raiders' 2001 championship hopes in the Foxborough snow. (Failing to convert a third-and-one didn't help, but that's another story.)"
Damn Florio you act like the Raiders stole your woman and kicked you in the nads. You ALWAYS have to make a dig. Are you familiar with the term "Journalistic Integrity"? I didn't think so.
Your little jab at Gruden's play calling (yes I blame him) doesn't change the fact that even with Chucky's lame-ass conservative play calling, the Raiders won the friggin game for about 30 seconds until Coleman found a way to screw us. And for those that say we could have won the game again after the f_ck ruling, why should we have to win the game twice, and overcome the natural emotional let down after getting screwed by the worst call in pro sports history.
At least all the hoodlums in football come from WV. Roll around in that one there Cornflorio.
"This could make the league more attractive and less dangerous for quarterbacks . . . like a certain former Falcon."
Brett Favre?
What counts as a "possession" in overtime.
Say Team A kicks off to Team B. Team B fields the ball cleanly and starts to return the kick. The returned gets crushed and fumbles the ball. Team A picks it up and runs it into the end zone. Game Over? Did Team B really have a possession?
"1. The biggest difference will come with overtime rules. Both teams will be allowed to possess the football, with true sudden death starting after one possession each.
In an offensive era, it's hard to argue with that one. It will create a number of new strategy decisions. (Will teams be more likely to play for a touchdown?)"
Personally I don't think the current sudden death OT system is that bad. If you don't want to lose, play some defense. Out of all the alternatives though I think this is the best one. It forces the team who gets the ball first to actually try for a touchdown rather than just set up the FG kicker.
So there won't be any sacks? That grounding rule has got to be the worst thing i've ever heard! There really won't be ANY sacks if i'm reading that correctly.
Anybody see that a different way?
Sounds good to me.
I don't like the "legally ground" rule. No defensive lineman will ever get a sack in this league.
like all of it except for the intentional grounding...there's only gonna be 5 sacks in the league for the season. Probably see more roughing the passer penalties as well because of said grounding rule...I'll tune in for the first week and see what happens.
Oh boy - here we go again... prepare for a litany of Oakland fans convinced that there's no such thing as a Tuck Rule.
Prepare for Oakland fans who would rather make believe the NFL Competition Committee didn't look at the Snow Bowl game and conclude the Tuck Rule was fairly and appropriately applied.
Prepare for Oakland fans who would rather ignore the fact that when the Competition Committee - lead by Patriots hater Bill Polian - had a chance to change the Tuck Rule and take it off the books completely - they kept it as is
And prepare for Oakland fans who ignore the fact that the Tuck rule comes into play several times each season.
But I suppose that would undermine their required belief that even though the Raiders couldn't convert 3rd and 1 they should have won that game (and presumably the Super Bowl title).
Not to get all "edumacated", but the UFL is emerging in the same manner as a 3rd political party. If this is true, then the UFL will make it's issue popular enough where the mainstream - i.e. NFL - will have to change its stance in order to please a wider number of voters / fans; the UFL will then go quietly into the night like the Green Party, Reform Party...etc.
Thank you....now I'm going back to ratemypoo.com.
Check out this video at 2:03....when this happens and you look at #4...who gets the ball?
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d80263a4b/49ers-17-Rams-16
I suppose if you wrap the QB up as soon as you hit him (i.e. before he can chuck it away), you'll still get a few sacks - but not even close to what you see in the NFL.
Who's gonna determine what's "tasteful" for the celebrations?
Sounds pretty cool...like the fact that they are more involved with the fans, like the fact they are allowing players to celebrate.
Prepare for idiot joe six pack who ignores that even the most overt Raider hating fans i know have VOLUNTEERED to me that the f_ck rule was, no doubt, the biggest screwing by offcials that any pro sports team has ever gotten.
You mean the NFL didn't out itself and say it was a bad call. BIG surprise there.
I have seen numerous examples of non-calls much closer to an actual tuck (one that comes to mind is a fumble Danny White made against the niners in a championship game in the 90's). Brady TOUCHED the ball back down with his left hand and was reset. There is no way on God's green earth that there was enough to over turn that call.
Travesty, and the day the NFL took on a tarnish for me and a lot of other fans. Pereira is a tool.
The one thing I have to say about the overtime rule is that my opinion it gives an unfair advantange to the team that has the ball second.
Lets say the team that gets the ball first scores on their first possession. The rule then allows the opposing team to play 4 down football for the duration of their drive, for if they don't convert, they lose.
I could see a lot of teams opting to kick off to start overtime to take advantage of the extra down per move of the chain.
The UFL doesn't sound like it will be as entertaining as the CFL games going on this week north of the border.
sounds like a conspiracy.
bruce: "Check out this video at 2:03....when this happens and you look at #4...who gets the ball?"
#4 sounds like the UFL would give the ball back to the offense in that case.
In your video, the defense made a good play, and they should be rewarded for it. In the UFL, they won't?
I don't see what's wrong with this NFL rule.
So the UFL got OT wrong as well. Enough with this sudden death stuff, and the equally ridiculous possession crap.
Overtime should be one period, JUST LIKE THE OTHER SEGMENTS OF THE GAME, after which a winner is determined. Fifteen minutes ideally, or ten minutes if the players' union whines about it. And you play that damn period over and over until someone wins.
The game should be decided in OT the SAME WAY IT IS DECIDED DURING REGULATION. It's really not that hard of a concept to grasp.
If your interested in the CFL, move to Moose Jaw and leave the rest of us in peace....
LOL @ Oakland fans!!!
Gruden lost the game when it was 3 & 1 and he gave the ball to Crockett for no gain when Garner was ripping off runs 7 yards on that drive and Crockett wasn't doing anything the whole game.
Look at their stats for the game-
Charlie Garner 17-64
Zack Crockett 3-3
I knew he made a mistake then, and it stands today.
Look at the drive-
Oakland at 02:41 1-10 at OAK 35 Charlie Garner (OAK) rushed up the middle for 7 yards. 2-3 at OAK 42 Patriots timeout; 02:31 remaining 4th quarter 2-3 at OAK 42 Charlie Garner (OAK) rushed right side for 2 yards. 3-1 at OAK 44 Patriots timeout; 02:24 remaining 4th quarter 3-1 at OAK 44 Zack Crockett (OAK) rushed up the middle for no gain
Hey Spicoli... so if the Tuck Rule is an errant rule, why, nearly 10 years after the Raiders game, has no one in the NFL bothered to rescind it.
In fact, it's endorsed by the competition committee each and every year.
With the McNair murder case we need a new conspiracy theory - go for it and attempt to explain this one.
(Aside from logic that Raiders fans have "VOLUNTEERED" to you that they got screwed by the officials, whatever that means)
Yes, Raiders and fans thereof, the tuck rule game sucked for you.
So did the 1978 bogus "roughing the passer" Ben Dreith call that ended the Pats season.
Sometimes there is karma. Accept.
i like all the rule changes. the NFL should watch what the UFL is doing and learn from them.
Hughuyue (sp) is definitely off to a good start here. i will be watching with interest!
** HUGE appreciation for allowing celebrations. i personally LOVE to watch the TD celebrations, the NFL taking that away is stupid.