Wouldn't life be simpler if we had a single Blocking Zone? What would be the "upside" vs. "downside" if we had a single blocking zone (maybe the current Low Blocking Zone), and Clipping (Rules 2-5 and 9-1-5) was revised to be only a low block from behind at or below the knee, and always illegal (one exception - no zones), and the BBW rules (Rule 9-1-6) were left (as is or enhanced) to cover all other BBW?
Something like (possible changes: RED = new language / CROSSED OUT = deleted language):
Rule 2, Section5. Clipping, ARTICLE 1.
a. Clipping is a block against an opponent in which the force of the initial contact is from behind and at or below the knee waist (Rule 9-1-5).
b. The position of the blocker's head or feet does not necessarily indicate the point of initial contact.
Rule 9, Section 1, Clipping, ARTICLE 5.
There shall be no clipping (Rule 2-5).
Exceptions:
1. Offensive players who are on the line of scrimmage at the snap within the blocking zone (Rule 2-3-6) legally may clip in the blocking zone, subject to the following restrictions:.
(a) A player in the blocking zone may not block an opponent with the force of the initial contact from behind and at or below the knee.
(b) A player on the line of scrimmage within the blocking zone may not leave the zone and return and legally clip.
(c) The blocking zone disintegrates when the ball leaves the zone (Rule 2-3-6).
1.2. When a player turns his back to a potential blocker who has committed himself in intent and direction or movement.
Thoughts, opinions, and would this type of rule change / simplification cause or have unintended consequences?
