Changing the NFL's dumbest rule means agreeing with the Packers

What if I told you that the NFL this offseason will consider a change to its worst rule — one that cost the Vikings dearly in a key game already this season — but one of the most important voices potentially spearheading the change is from the Packers?

Right. It's time to put rivalries aside. A good idea is a good idea, and Packers President Mark Murphy was absolutely right when he said this week at the NFL Owners Meetings that the rule awarding a defensive touchback after an offense fumble through the end zone is "too punitive."

The NFL might have bigger things to consider, including the state of officiating and safety in the game. But ESPN notes of the fumble/touchback rule that "changes to the current rule could come in the offseason." If there is a change, as I talked about on Thursday's Daily Delivery podcast, it would be cause for celebration.

Vikings fans will remember the brunt of the rule hitting the purple earlier this season. Justin Jefferson fumbled near the goal line against the Eagles, and a review showed that the ball went out of bounds in the end zone. That meant it was Philadelphia's ball at their own 20. It was just inches from being out of bounds on the sideline, where the Vikings would have retained possession at the Eagles' 1.

The Vikings ended up losing by six.

Here are some options the NFL could consider this offseason, including my own suggested possible changes to the rule:

*Do nothing. That's the easiest thing, but it wouldn't fix a bad rule. On any other out-of-bounds fumble, the ball stays with the offense. Why should a fumble in the end zone result in not just a change of possession but a bunch of yards as well?

*Tweak the rule so that the defense gains possession at the spot where the fumble occurred — which would typically be very close to the goal line. This would be better than the current rule, but still probably too harsh given that possession still changes.

*Change the rule so that the offense keeps possession, but ding the fumbling team with a 10-yard penalty from the spot of the fumble and a loss of downs. So if it was a third-and-goal play, it's now fourth down from around the 11. If it was a fourth down play, it's a turnover on downs. If it was first- or second-and-goal, the offense still has downs left to score a touchdown. If the play started from further away and gained first-down yardage before being fumbled through the end zone, the play stands but it's now second-and-goal from the 11.

*Swing all the way to the opposite end of the spectrum and treat a fumble out of the end zone like a fumble out of bounds and give the ball back to the offense at the spot of the fumble.

I think I like the 10-yard penalty and loss of downs option the best, but I'd welcome any meaningful and smart change this offseason.

Here are four more things to know today:

*Speaking of Jefferson, it sounds like he will play Saturday in Cincinnati after having to leave Sunday's game in Vegas in an ambulance. Chip Scoggins has more details on that.

*It's an intriguing Wolves game at Dallas on Thursday and a big stretch of tough games for them. Chris Hine and I talked about the 17-5 start and the difficult road ahead on Thursday's podcast.

*Here's an interesting piece on Draymond Green and the culture of coddling in Golden State in the wake of Green's latest incident and indefinite suspension.

*It's been a newsy stretch for the Gophers men's basketball team. Marcus Fuller will help put things in perspective on Friday's podcast.