The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I am going to operate under the given that the NFL is changing and that QBs are going to be protected.  ...so, while I'd like to see some of those rules rolled back, it ain't happenin'.  Here's how I say you fix it.

First, outline the problem:  In my opinion, penalties are becoming too much a factor in the game.  They are applied too liberally, they seem to penalize people for making otherwise good plays, and they are being used as bait plays in some cases, where teams run a play trying to draw a flag.

Idea 1: Make personal fouls on the QB (for hits to the head, low tackles, driving into the ground, late hit, etc) have two levels, similar to what they've done to roughing/running into kicker and 5/15 facemask penalties.  Leave it up to the discretion of the ref whether or not the contact was incidental (like a slap in the head trying to bat a ball) and reckless play.

Idea 2: Allow judgement calls to be reviewed.  It may open Pandora's box, but so be it -- let refs look at PI and personal foul calls and overturn if needed.  The game happens so fast that trying to judge whether something was early or late or a hit to the head or chest is just too much to ask and the stakes are too high.

Idea 3: (Not a rule change, but a change in focus)  The final thing the refs need to consider is if the contact in PI calls affected the outcome of the play.  Too often, there are calls made where the ball is untouchable, but there's contact.  Maybe you also create a new penalty for something in between defensive holding and PI for calls where there is contact, but there was no realistic chance of defender catching the ball.  As is, an uncatchable pass means it has to be about 10 yards away.

I think PI in the end zone should be half the distance to the goal

Pass interference should be 15 yards, not spot of foul.  To big of an advantage on the long pass

Agree unless it's intentional like the PI that Wallace drew a couple weeks ago where the guy just tackles him so that he can't score. That should be a spot foul.

Any Pass interference that results in the ball being advanced over 25 yards should be review-able. Not ALL pass interference calls so if its  10 or 15 yard pass that gets called for PI,....can't challenge that, Just the "big" ones. I say 25 yards but if its 30 or 35 or whatever....something along those lines

I also believe that PI should only be a 15 yd penalty. Offensive PI isn't an automatic 4th down. So why should defensive PI be an automatic possible 55 yd gain?

Defensive holding should be a 5 yd penalty. Not an automatic 1st down.

I would also agree with the grading of roughing the passer. With the 15 yd variety being an automatic review. If the play results in the lesser 5 yd variety, then it's only a 5 yd penalty. No automatic 1st down. No fine for the offender. Incidental contact is going to happen. You should not be penalized twice for that. Side note: plays like the Ahmad Brooks hit on Drew Brees would be seen as a non foul. There was no contact with the head. No malicious intent.

Treating the 15 yd roughing the passer like they do flagrant fouls in the NBA, I believe is the way to go.  You get fined for them & after so many there is a suspension. The only difference I would make is that if a penalty isn't called during the game, you cannot get fined/suspended after the game.

Disagree with this one. Cause then every DB will hold all the time if its only 5 yards and not an automatic first down. What's 5 yards in the big picture!

If they hold every time then twice is a first down in the big picture.

I'd like to see them do away with the seldom seen rule where a player on punt coverage who goes out of bounds cannot be the first person to touch the ball. I can understand keeping it if they run out on their own but if forced out by a blocker I don't like it. What sport except football doesn't allow a player back into the field of play?

These rule changes would have much more serious effects than you all are considering.  Remember in the SB last year when BAL had to "punt" out of their end zone (read: took intentional safety) and the punt protection team basically just tackled all the punt block team because holding in the end zone has the same result?

If defensive holding is only a 5 yard penalty, then near the end of games (when teams are trying to come back) you would see players getting absolutely mugged.  Same goes for DPI.

Yep!!

I agree with this.  I am afraid of the 15 yards max for PI, because I think that you'll see the penalty used on purpose to manipulate the game.  The long ball in the NFL is too much a rarity as it is, and I'd have to incentivize taking that that away.

I do like Mike's idea of challenges over X amount of yards.  I also like the 1/2 the distance to the goal penalty for PI in the endzone.

I disagree with this point. Why not just jump offsides every play? Taking away the automatic 1st down portion of the penalty doesn't create an incentive to hold. It takes away a cheap offensive 1st down. If the ball is thrown to a receiver that is being held, it becomes PI. The automatic 1st down
wn then comes back into play.

Because jumping offsides almost always gets called.  Holding is missed regularly.  Additionally, you would hold in response to getting beaten, where you know a bigger play is coming, whereas jumping offsides happens before the play starts.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/03/bill-belichick-why-not-let-coaches-challenge-everything/

Belichick makes a good point and he is 100% right

^^^ They should be able to.

Horrible idea.

Belichick seems to be conveniently ignoring that all challenges after the 2-min warning are from upstairs, and that all turnovers/scoring plays are reviewed.  This would turn replay into a fishing expedition for any hold (evaluated in slo-mo, mind you) that would negate whatever big play just happened.

No he isn't. And as the article states (although not a Belichick quote), even though some plays are automatically reviewed, only the parts of the play that could be challenged normally can be reversed. So you could easily have a situation where an interception is allowed to stand even though the defender clearly and indisputably commits pass interference (or a face mask or any of the other cannot-challenge aspects).


Coaches only get 2 challenges (3 if both are right), so it seems unlikely that there would be any semblance of "fishing expedition". Additionally, if there really was a huge, indisputable hold, why SHOULD the big play stand?

Judgement calls will always be harder to overturn on instant replay and coaches will figure that out and use their challenges accordingly.

I'm with Bellichek.  I also think that you should be able to challenge as long as you are right.  And the same rules to overturn apply.  So, holding must be CLEARLY holding to overturn.

You don't seem to grasp the point Belichick is making.

Belichick is asking for everything to be able to be challenged.  Therefore, the concept of "only the parts of the play that could be challenged normally can be reversed" simply doesn't apply.  You could challenge for holds, face masks, PIs, false starts, forward progress... anything.

You're missing the entire point of the article.

"If it’s offensive holding, if you think one of the offensive linemen tackles your guy as he’s rushing the quarterback, and the ball hasn’t been thrown, they go back and look at it and if it’s that egregious of a violation they would make a call. If it wasn’t, they wouldn’t. We have to live with that anyway but now it’s only on certain plays and certain situations."

As I just said, that does not apply to scoring plays, turnovers, or in the last 2 min of each half, where all reviews come from the booth (and there is no limit to them).  Keep in mind that coaches are not permitted to challenge in those situations.  So what do you do if you're a coach and you think there's offensive holding on a scoring play?

The only answer is to review every scoring play for any possible offensive hold (anywhere on the field), every interception for any possible defensive hold (anywhere on the field), every turnover on downs at the end of a half for any possible PI (anywhere on the field), etc.  Either that, or you create a two-tier challenge system where judgment calls can only be challenged on non-scoring/turnover/end-of-half plays, which removes a lot of the point.