What NFL rule changes would you like to see?

[saevel25]

1) Allowing DB's to push WR's out of bounds to deny a catch.

2) Changing the instant replay to the college style with a guy in the booth.

[boogielicious]

1) Allowing DB's to push WR's out of bounds to deny a catch.

2) Changing the instant replay to the college style with a guy in the booth.

1. Make PI only a spot foul or max 15 yard penalty or allow contact up to 10 yards.

I hate the game changing 43 yard PI in the fourth quarter. Single biggest penalty in the game.

[Abu3baid]

1. Make PI only a spot foul or max 15 yard penalty or allow contact up to 10 yards. I hate the game changing 43 yard PI in the fourth quarter. Single biggest penalty in the game.

I disagree.. Pass interference is meant to be a debilitating penalty because you are illegally preventing someone from catching the ball at what ever spot the play is.. So, if the penalty wasn't what it is someone could easily just commit it and live to see another day and maybe get an Interception on the next play for example.. You don't want to get penalized then play the damn ball and not the guy, pretty simple!

[turtleback]

I hate the game changing 43 yard PI in the fourth quarter. Single biggest penalty in the game.

While that can certainly change a game, the flip side is that having a lesser penalty can also make it open season on receivers in the 4th quarter.

[saevel25]

I get both sides on that. In the end, if you know your beat just yank him down 10 yards downfield. Then it's not a 40 yard penalty ;)

[Abu3baid]

I get both sides on that. In the end, if you know your beat just yank him down 10 yards downfield. Then it's not a 40 yard penalty ;)

It's not that easy... lol Those guys are so fast, usually the only reason the DB can pass interfere is because the receiver is slowing down to catch the ball.

[boogielicious]

I get both sides on that. In the end, if you know your beat just yank him down 10 yards downfield. Then it's not a 40 yard penalty ;)

I guess it depends on whether you prefer offense or defense. I prefer the later. My point is either let the DB have 10 yards of contact and give him a chance, or remove the 'stroke and distance' penalty that a long PI affords. Many times they call it and upon review it was the receiver who initiated the contact or turned into the DB. The PI gives the offense both distance and clock stoppage, which is advantage offense in the end of the game when time is critical.

[Mac62]

1)  10-yard bump/chuck zone for DBs.

2)  Field goal points:  10-25 yds. = 1 point.  25-40 yds = 2 points.  40-55 yds = 3 points.  55+ yds = 4 points.  This rewards the increased skill of longer FGs and also introduces a strategic element into when you're going to attempt the kick.

[newtogolf]

I guess it depends on whether you prefer offense or defense. I prefer the later. My point is either let the DB have 10 yards of contact and give him a chance, or remove the 'stroke and distance' penalty that a long PI affords. Many times they call it and upon review it was the receiver who initiated the contact or turned into the DB. The PI gives the offense both distance and clock stoppage, which is advantage offense in the end of the game when time is critical.

The problem with PI is that the rule "assumes" that the WR will catch the ball.  I've seen too many PI calls where it was unlikely the WR would have caught the ball if he had not been interfered with.  I am okay with the penalty being the distance of the pass but I think they need to tighten the part about the pass being catchable had the interference not occurred, maybe subject it to review if PI occurs in last two minutes of half or game.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

I guess it depends on whether you prefer offense or defense. I prefer the later. My point is either let the DB have 10 yards of contact and give him a chance, or remove the 'stroke and distance' penalty that a long PI affords. Many times they call it and upon review it was the receiver who initiated the contact or turned into the DB. The PI gives the offense both distance and clock stoppage, which is advantage offense in the end of the game when time is critical.

The problem with PI is that the rule "assumes" that the WR will catch the ball.  I've seen too many PI calls where it was unlikely the WR would have caught the ball if he had not been interfered with.  I am okay with the penalty being the distance of the pass but I think they need to tighten the part about the pass being catchable had the interference not occurred, maybe subject it to review if PI occurs in last two minutes of half or game.

It has been recommended that this type of call be reviewable as part of a coaches challenge. This way it would be abused. I would like to see that.

[jamo]

1) Allowing DB's to push WR's out of bounds to deny a catch.

That rule was different until like 10 years ago. They used to try to split hairs about whether or not the receiver could have come down with it in bounds had he not been pushed. Then again, maybe that's more practical now with instant replay.

[saevel25]

That rule was different until like 10 years ago. They used to try to split hairs about whether or not the receiver could have come down with it in bounds had he not been pushed.

Then again, maybe that's more practical now with instant replay.

I just think it's stupid. Philosophically I believe that the DB's should be able to use the sideline as a way to deny a catch.

[Golfingdad]

I disagree.. Pass interference is meant to be a debilitating penalty because you are illegally preventing someone from catching the ball at what ever spot the play is.. So, if the penalty wasn't what it is someone could easily just commit it and live to see another day and maybe get an Interception on the next play for example.. You don't want to get penalized then play the damn ball and not the guy, pretty simple!

If this was true, wouldn't we see this occurring in the college game? Their PI rules are exactly as Scott suggests for the pros and they get along just fine. 15 yards and an automatic first down is still an ENORMOUS penalty - when you consider, like newtogolf mentioned, that many of these balls are not being caught anyway, even without the interference. Because you know what's 10,000 times worse than a guy intentionally committing interference on a "sure thing" play and saving his team a few yards? A bogus PI call 50 yards downfield because their feet got tangled or something and a team is all but gifted a touchdown.

[Abu3baid]

The problem with PI is that the rule "assumes" that the WR will catch the ball.  I've seen too many PI calls where it was unlikely the WR would have caught the ball if he had not been interfered with.  I am okay with the penalty being the distance of the pass but I think they need to tighten the part about the pass being catchable had the interference not occurred, maybe subject it to review if PI occurs in last two minutes of half or game.

[quote name="Golfingdad" url="/t/83965/what-nfl-rule-changes-would-you-like-to-see/10_10#post_1188397"] If this was true, wouldn't we see this occurring in the college game? Their PI rules are exactly as Scott suggests for the pros and they get along just fine. 15 yards and an automatic first down is still an ENORMOUS penalty - when you consider, like newtogolf mentioned, that many of these balls are not being caught anyway, even without the interference. Because you know what's 10,000 times worse than a guy intentionally committing interference on a "sure thing" play and saving his team a few yards? A bogus PI call 50 yards downfield because their feet got tangled or something and a team is all but gifted a touchdown.[/quote] In my opinion it is not enormous enough (15 yard penalty) for this egregious penalty.. Many of the balls not catchable? Do you have statistics on that or you just making stuff up? What Newton said was he would like to see a provision that they don't give the penalty if it is not catchable.. Two different things, and he seems ok with the penalty as log as they get it right. If they don't get it right then it doesn't matter if it is a 15 Yarder or distance, it was still not a good call. There college rules and NFL have differences in them, personally I'd like to keep it that way.

[newtogolf]

In my opinion it is not enormous enough (15 yard penalty) for this egregious penalty.. Many of the balls not catchable? Do you have statistics on that or you just making stuff up? What Newton said was he would like to see a provision that they don't give the penalty if it is not catchable.. Two different things, and he seems ok with the penalty as log as they get it right. If they don't get it right then it doesn't matter if it is a 15 Yarder or distance, it was still not a good call.

There college rules and NFL have differences in them, personally I'd like to keep it that way.

There are no statistics that can prove this but if you watch a lot of football, as I have, you'd know this to be the case.  The NFL believes the general audience prefers high scoring games so they create and enforce rules that handcuff the defense to help the offense score points.

Too many smart QB's like Manning, Brady, Brees know that if they send their WR on a fly route the odds are in their favor that either the WR will catch the ball or the defense will get called for PI if they put the ball in the general vicinity.  The NFL referees also give the benefit of the doubt to some QB's & WR's over others, just like fouls in the NBA.  When a rule is so imbalanced and favors one side so greatly it minimally needs to be reviewed automatically or on challenge.

[Abu3baid]

There are no statistics that can prove this but if you watch a lot of football, as I have, you'd know this to be the case.  The NFL believes the general audience prefers high scoring games so they create and enforce rules that handcuff the defense to help the offense score points. Too many smart QB's like Manning, Brady, Brees know that if they send their WR on a fly route the odds are in their favor that either the WR will catch the ball or the defense will get called for PI if they put the ball in the general vicinity.  The NFL referees also give the benefit of the doubt to some QB's & WR's over others, just like fouls in the NBA.  When a rule is so imbalanced and favors one side so greatly it minimally needs to be reviewed automatically or on challenge.

Yeah, I grew up watching football and still do and I don't agree with you.. Now unless there are statistics on how referees call PI on plays where the ball is not catchable "most of the time" or "many of the time" or even more than 30% of the time then where does this leave us? Just a bunch of guys with "opinions".. I've seen enough plays where people got tangled and the ball was not catchable and the call was not made.. "Not admissible evidence by the way, just showing you how easy your argument that you've seen is to counter" and it's true I have seen enough of them. Also, of course the defense is at a disadvantage, think about it, that WR knows exactly where the ball is supposed to be, the QB knows exactly where he wants to throw the ball and the DB is reacting the whole time and is always tying I make up a step or two and usually with his hands or body because most of the time he doesn't even know when to look back for the ball until he sees the WR basically making a move.. Your premise that they are doing this because they want high scores is not one I agree with, because they change rules all the time.. Heck, didn't they use to call it a catch if a receiver was pushed out? Why change that? Wouldn't it help get more catches and more scores to keep it the way it is?

[newtogolf]

Yeah, I grew up watching football and still do and I don't agree with you.. Now unless there are statistics on how referees call PI on plays where the ball is not catchable "most of the time" or "many of the time" or even more than 30% of the time then where does this leave us? Just a bunch of guys with "opinions"..

I've seen enough plays where people got tangled and the ball was not catchable and the call was not made.. "Not admissible evidence by the way, just showing you how easy your argument that you've seen is to counter" and it's true I have seen enough of them.

Also, of course the defense is at a disadvantage, think about it, that WR knows exactly where the ball is supposed to be, the QB knows exactly where he wants to throw the ball and the DB is reacting the whole time and is always tying I make up a step or two and usually with his hands or body because most of the time he doesn't even know when to look back for the ball until he sees the WR basically making a move..

Your premise that they are doing this because they want high scores is not one I agree with, because they change rules all the time.. Heck, didn't they use to call it a catch if a receiver was pushed out? Why change that? Wouldn't it help get more catches and more scores to keep it the way it is?

Look at the rules changes over the last 15 years and you will see they heavily favor the offense.

• Defensive players used to be able to make contact with WR for 10 yards, now it's 5.
• Contact with QB is restricted to chest to thighs, hits above or below those areas result in 15 yard penalty and first down.  Even lineman on the ground cannot make contact with QB below the knee.
• Offensive lineman may now line up 2 yards behind line of scrimmage
• Offensive lineman were permitted to extend their arms for blocking
• Hits to outstretched WR's or prone receivers are penalized 15 yards and first down.  Defenses basically have to allow a WR to catch a ball before they hit them.
• Tuck rule
• Balls can now touch the ground and be considered a catch if the WR is deemed to "maintain control"
• Horse collar tackles including grabbing of jersey are made illegal
• Emphasis on defensive holding and illegal contact.

Just look at the offensive stats of players over the last five years.  Do you really think the uptick in scoring and yards gained is just a result of the offensive players being better athletes?

[Golfingdad]

In my opinion it is not enormous enough (15 yard penalty) for this egregious penalty.. Many of the balls not catchable? Do you have statistics on that or you just making stuff up? What Newton said was he would like to see a provision that they don't give the penalty if it is not catchable.. Two different things, and he seems ok with the penalty as log as they get it right. If they don't get it right then it doesn't matter if it is a 15 Yarder or distance, it was still not a good call. There college rules and NFL have differences in them, personally I'd like to keep it that way.

You misinterpret what we're saying. Neither of us said "not catchable" as in shouldn't have been a penalty, we said and meant they're not being caught (common sense because most deep balls aren't caught) so I'd rather shrink the penalty a tad because a bogus call undeserved is way worse than a good call that "only" gives them 15 yards and a new set of downs.