How to prevent teams from giving up a rouge intentionally

I would like to see teams stop giving up rouges intentionally, and instead try to return the ball instead. This way we get to see more exciting plays, and teams have to earn their point or field position.

To accomplish this I think we need to give the returning team fewer yards after a rouge. Would any teams want to risk giving up one point, and a safety, and ball possession? I don’t think so, this will give them reason to go for returns.

However in some situations it would be unfair to the returning team to give up a point and get bad field position (nonreturnable ball, missed field goal could mean 3 points a possession back). Therefore, I think that the rules should be as follows.

1.If a punt or a missed field goal goes through the endzone in the air (back or sides) the kicking team is awarded 1 point, and the receiving team is given possession on their own 20 yard line.

This is no change since the return team had no chance to attempt a return.

2.If a punt or missed field goal goes through the endzone on the ground (back or sides, at least one bounce) the kicking team is awarded 1 point, and the receiving team is given possession on their own 15 yard line.

This is a slight change, since it can be hard to determine if a ball that went through the endzone after a bounce was really returnable we will take the middle ground and give the receiving team not good, or bad, but ok field position.

3.If a punt or missed field goal is not advanced out of the endzone the kicking team is awarded 1 point, and the receiving team is given possession on their own 10 yard line.

This is the biggest change. If a team makes no effort to return the ball (or a kick return coverage team makes a really good play) they don’t deserve to get good field position out of it.

i believe that these rule changes would not only achieve their goal of eliminating intentionally giving up rouges, but would also have the benefits of making the punting game more important (creating offense and field position), and in turn make what has increasingly had a bigger impact on the game for the last few years (kick returns, how many TDs have we seen from them recently) even more exciting by making it vital for returners to make a good return when they are deep in their own zone.

This is an awesome idea! Can someone with some clout refer this idea to the league office?

I think the rouge is fine the way it is.

Do you want the yards or do you want the point? It's completely strategic and the odds of benefit either way are roughly even. Don't mess with perfection.

I think it is a horrid idea. You would never see a coffin corner kick again...those punters that have honed that accuracy would be defunct. I would rarely kick a FG but rather punt into the endzone personally. Would you rather have 3 points or pin the team at the 10? This shift in mentality would put a lot more focus on D, and it would become even more of a field position game. I don't like it.

Exactly my thoughts. There have been way to many games of the years where that rouge determines the outcome of the game. It also contributes to more last gasp two point converts being attempted making for a more exciting end to a game.

One change that I would like to see however is having O start on their own side of the 55 in OT. They should at least be two first downs away before being in field goal range.

Don;t get me started on the abomination known as the shootout OT. :roll:

It's fine the way it is, leave it be, it's still light years better then the touchback. The only change I would make is remove the point if a Field Goal is attempted and missed, but keep the points if you punt it. Make it so that having a play hold the ball in preparation of a kick, it signifies a field goal attempt, and it becomes a 3 or nothing kick.

I have no problems with the rouge, just with teams giving up points intentionally.

Yeah seriously -- it's just scrimmage ball not real football.

The funny thing is, is that if people have an issue with the rouge, it's usually regarding unintentionally giving up points, i.e. a missed field goal sailing through the endzone, not allowing the defending team a chance to return.

For the record, I want the rouge to stay as is.

There was an intentional safety in the last Super Bowl.

That's way too complicated for me.

How about this? If the ball is kicked over the goal line and not returned into the field of play, 1 point.
If the ball is kicked through the uprights, 3 points.
If the ball is advanced over the goal line, 6 points.

I really do not like the proposed changes. It is fine the way it is.

ppffft.... another one of these "new fans" who can't understand and appreciate the rules.

leave the bloody damn rules alone!!!

I'm not a "new fan", and even if I was why would you attack them all. If there weren't any new fans the CFL would have died in the 1800's.

Also, rule changes aren't a bad thing. Should the CFL get rid of the forward pass? That was a rule change. Just because I don't like one side effect of a rule (which is a very minor part of the game), and try to fix that by modifying the rule (not eliminating it), doesn't make me a lesser fan. So get of your high hoarse and realize that change isn't always a bad thing.

So what, just because it happens in the Super Bowl doesn't make it good.

The point is that intentionally giving up points is stupid, and if that is what is strategic then it should be changed. Imagine how dumb it would look if a hockey team pulled their goalie and intentionally scored on themselves.

That still applies, the only difference is where the receiving team gets the ball.

Also, I just noticed I got the yardages wrong.

Rule 1 should be 35 yard line (what it is currently, not sure why I thought it was 20)
Rule 2 should be 25 yard line
Rule 3 should be 15 yard line

I think the rouge is fine the way it is. However, I am curious about your stance, GoRiders, on giving up points intentionally. I find that calling it "giving up points" is a really loaded term. It's really preventing more points from being scored on you. If you take the example of a conceding a safety, it often is the best option. As an example, if you remove or penalize the safety on the grounds that it's "intentionally giving up points" then teams pinned to the endzone would have to punt the ball away, and it doesn't take much of a return to instantly put the other team in field goal range, where instead of "giving up" 2 points, the team has now "given up" 3 points.

Returning to the rouge, if you give up a rouge, it's because the returner thinks it would be unwise to return the ball, because the risk of being pinned at the back of their own endzone is high. Think of it this way; if you prevent teams from intentionally giving up a rouge, and force them to go for a return that they wouldn't normally do (any returner who gives up a rouge is doing so because he thinks he can't get a good return anyways), then chances are they'll be pinned at the back of their own endzone, and a 2-and-out will suddenly force them to potentially give up a safety. All of a sudden, "giving up" 1 point has turned into "giving up" 2 points.

I think the idea of conceding a safety or a rouge is fine. It's part of the strategy of the game.

That's what makes it too complicated