Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="chucknorris101" data-source="post: 303110" data-attributes="member: 2208">I think the single thing i would change is the review system. I like limited reviews. 2 given with a third bonus if you get both right. thats good. so the general mechanisms and scheme remain the same however. i think every play should be reviewable for anything. Questionable PI call? Red Flag. Missed holding? Red Flag. Forward progress? Red Flag. Helmet to helmet not called? red flag.  basically anything and everything is held to scrutiny.  As a corollary, this would mean that the entire play becomes under review, so if youre looking for a better spot or wanting the facemask called, youll have to answer for your olineman getting away with a hold. so much more risk/reward as well. and hey itd probably create more jobs for teams for people to just review any questionable calls for possible reviews.why this is good:1. gets rid of those awful calls that change games2. makes refs more honest knowing they could be called out3. makes challenges more strategic, only having two with so many more options to challenge on makes coaches really think about it.4. gets rid of those calls that are 'unreviewable'i really cannot see any reason why this is not better than what is currently in place. especially in light of all the press referee errors have been getting. can anyone spot any flaws?</blockquote>

Total: 725 (members: 1, guests: 724)