I tuned in to NFL Radio Thursday afternoon and someone from New England's organization was talking about the Patriots. I couldn't pin down the voice, but it soon became obvious it was Belichick. I was a little shocked because it's been ages since I've heard him give an interview, aside from post-game press conferences, where he has a substantially different tone.
He spent half of the segment talking about his push to expand instant replay to make every play challengeable. Off the top of my head, I can think of two non-challangeable calls that cost NE games in the past 10 years, and they were both last year, against the Jets and Panthers. But then they won a game on non-challengeable last-minute call against the Browns.
I found it ironic that the coach who arguably is the recipient of the most favorable non-challengeable calls in NFL history is campaigning for such a rule change. I hate myself for writing this, but I agree with him -- I don't see a down side to his take, which is this:
“Whatever it happens to be, it wouldn't give the coach any more challenges. It would just give him a chance to challenge a play he thought was ruled incorrectly. In the grand scheme of things, I think what we all want is to get the play right and for the best team to win and for the game not to be decided by a missed call. To not have the opportunity to correct that type of play, it just doesn't seem like it’s the right way to do it." {Linky}
I'm interested in opposing views on this. Why would it be a bad idea? Does a "Just-give-it-to-them" scenario happen if this rule is in place?