JAX@LV: Hopalong Lawrence

We present the ugly side of the forward progress rule. See for yourself.

Jacksonville’s Trevor Lawrence bunnyhops over his offensive line, briefly reaches the ball into the end zone’s airspace, then gets knocked backward.

He has no intent of actually getting into the end zone. He is simply exploiting the way-lenient break-the-plane rule, hoping to get credit for a touchdown by technicality. And he succeeds — just as he did in Week 7 and Week 16 of the 2022 season, and during the postseason that year. Why stop? It’s just too easy.

People who dismiss our quest to modify the break-the-plane rule insist, and rightly so, that the ball’s furthest advancement at the end of a play determines where it should be placed. That’s forward progress. That makes sense.

Yet we believe forward progress should change when goal lines are involved. Why? Because points are involved at the goal line. To us, merely waving the ball over a goal line is an inadequate effort for a huge payout of six points. In a contact sport, ball carriers should be obligated to make some contact, however minimal, with the end zone — football’s designated scoring area.

The downside: Our rule could negate high-effort end zone dives where a runner’s knees hit in front of the goal line while the ball, held in outstretched arms, remains in midair. That would take some time for fans to adjust to the ruling, since for decades all of us have become accustomed to seeing no-touch touchdowns dished out like nonstop free samples at Costco.

Such a change, we maintain, would be better than witnessing more cheap bunnyhop TDs from Lawrence and fellow touchdown charlatans. These are ugly blotches that mar a fantastic game. Hocus Bogus Rating: 5

Note: Check our compilation clip, Reaches & Bunnyhops, in the Film Room.

KC@BUF: Forward non-progess

Buffalo’s Josh Allen has racked up a few bunnyhop touchdowns of his own during his career. Here he goes straight ahead and runs into an impenetrable Kansas City blockade. He is initally (and correctly, in our opinion) ruled short.

But because he was able to lean forward just enough, Allen walks away with an unimpressive six points. Another touchdown by technicality. Rating: 5

ATL@NE: Pylon follies, pt. 1

While some readers think our view on forward progress and goal lines is a bridge too far, nearly everyone agrees football’s interpretation of pylons needs reconsideration.

Pylons are 100 percent out of bounds. 100 percent. So why is hitting one with the ball (as New England’s Stefon Diggs does here) considered worthy of six points? Why do television rules analysts use the term “goal line extended” when describing why pylons are illogically ruled to be part of the goal line, allowing the goal line to extend four inches into out-of-bounds territory? Why is the offense given such an odd advantage? Rating: 5

CHI@CIN: Pylon follies, pt. 2

Chicago’s DJ Moore is pushed outside of the pylon AND loses control of the ball as he sails past it. Yet in its eagerness to put points on the scoreboard, the league somehow considers this a touchdown. It is truly difficult to understand why. Rating: 5

SF@NYG: Pylon follies, pt. 3

Like DJ Moore (above), the Giants’ Theo Johnson lands out of bounds, never touching the end zone. But because he managed to wave the ball through a wisp of the end zone’s airspace near the pylon, he gets handed six points. The three 49er defenders who knocked him out of bounds get nothing out of it except maybe some low film scores.  Rating: 4.5

SF@NYG: Flyover

If ball carriers such as San Francisco’s Jauan Jennings are allowed to dive over a corner of the end zone, never touch it, and land a yard or so out of bounds, doesn’t that make the end zone wider for the offense? And force the defense to defend an extra-wide end zone? End zones are already 53.5 yards wide. Do ball carriers really need the additional space? Advantage, offense. Rating: 4