Why doesn't the NFL change Defensive PI to 15 yards?

[Rubes]

I know this has certainly come up in the past, but I'm old as !@#$ and I can't remember any of the arguments for or against it. But watching these last few weeks of games got me thinking about this again, as several critical defensive PI calls have come up that dramatically swung the tide in favor of the offense.

 

I hate that defensive PI is a spot foul—obviously when it happens when the Bills are on defense, but also even when the Bills get a call like that on offense, because it just seems like such a cheap way to get a ton of yards. Especially when it happens in the end zone and the ball is placed at the 1. I really despise that. And I don't like that this has actually become part of offensive strategy, to throw it up and look for that possibility.

 

Any time there is a defensive penalty like unnecessary roughness that comes with 15 yards and an automatic first down, it's pretty great if you're on offense and hurts bad if you're on defense, no matter where the ball is or the situation.

 

Enough with the spot foul on defensive PI. Make it 15 yards and an automatic first down. That's painful enough for a defense. Hell, offensive PI is only 10 yards.

 

[NoSaint]

What stops the saints safety from just tackling the receiver before the ball gets there yesterday (besides his inability to tackle) if it’s a 15 yarder instead of spot?

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, NoSaint said:

What stops the saints safety from just tackling the receiver before the ball gets there yesterday (besides his inability to tackle) if it’s a 15 yarder instead of spot?

 

Yup. Belichick would do it every game.

Does anyone remember when he had his players tackle our receivers a couple years back because Taylor was out of the pocket and apparently that's legal? I haven't really seen it since, but as far as I can remember that's still the rule, along with no roughing the QB outside of the pocket.

[Rochesterfan]

2 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

What stops the saints safety from just tackling the receiver before the ball gets there yesterday (besides his inability to tackle) if it’s a 15 yarder instead of spot?

 

Exactly - you basically eliminate the big play - anyone that is beat just tackle the WR.

 

This is especially true at the end of the game - it would have killed the end of the Saints game and probably the Baltimore/Cincinnati game that got us in.

[bills6969]

They should institute 2 levels of PI, both with different penalties.  A PI 1 is just your basic strong contact, no intention of taking the WR out - 15 yards penalty.  A PI 2 is blatant and intentional,  purposely trying to take out the WR so he cant make the catch - spot foul 

[CDogg20]

9 minutes ago, bills6969 said:

They should institute 2 levels of PI, both with different penalties.  A PI 1 is just your basic strong contact, no intention of taking the WR out - 15 yards penalty.  A PI 2 is blatant and intentional,  purposely trying to take out the WR so he cant make the catch - spot foul 

This ^

 

Great idea. 

[BuffaloBillyG]

14 minutes ago, bills6969 said:

They should institute 2 levels of PI, both with different penalties.  A PI 1 is just your basic strong contact, no intention of taking the WR out - 15 yards penalty.  A PI 2 is blatant and intentional,  purposely trying to take out the WR so he cant make the catch - spot foul 

Then DBs will figure out how to purposely take down a WR and make it look incidental. And that leaves more room for the refs to influence the outcome with "judgement calls". No thanks.

[Rubes]

27 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

What stops the saints safety from just tackling the receiver before the ball gets there yesterday (besides his inability to tackle) if it’s a 15 yarder instead of spot?

 

Nothing, of course. But on one hand, the game can't end on a defensive penalty, so the offense gets another shot. And keeps getting shots until the defense stops doing it.

 

On the other hand, another idea would be to make defensive PI a spot foul when it's inside 2:00 of each half. (I still don't like that, but it would hekp somewhat.)

 

[KD in CA]

4 minutes ago, KelsaysLunchbox said:

Then DBs will figure out how to purposely take down a WR and make it look incidental. And that leaves more room for the refs to influence the outcome with "judgement calls". No thanks.

 

But those always work out so well for the Bills.   

[ColdFront_USAF]

30 minutes ago, bills6969 said:

They should institute 2 levels of PI, both with different penalties.  A PI 1 is just your basic strong contact, no intention of taking the WR out - 15 yards penalty.  A PI 2 is blatant and intentional,  purposely trying to take out the WR so he cant make the catch - spot foul 

 

I really like this idea on paper, but these officials can't even handle the rule book they already have. Frankly I don't think anyone could given it's complexity. 

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

53 minutes ago, bills6969 said:

They should institute 2 levels of PI, both with different penalties.  A PI 1 is just your basic strong contact, no intention of taking the WR out - 15 yards penalty.  A PI 2 is blatant and intentional,  purposely trying to take out the WR so he cant make the catch - spot foul 

Our CB's would get PI 2 and the Patriots CB's would get PI1. Just another decision that the refs would use to give the Pats an advantage. 

[WMDman]

im fine with the rule

[BillsFan130]

I agree with you. Too many game changing 30-50 yard flags.

 

Half of those calls are mistakes by the officials as the receivers will just fall down if they feel the slightest contact

1 hour ago, bills6969 said:

They should institute 2 levels of PI, both with different penalties.  A PI 1 is just your basic strong contact, no intention of taking the WR out - 15 yards penalty.  A PI 2 is blatant and intentional,  purposely trying to take out the WR so he cant make the catch - spot foul 

They tried to do that with the facemask penalty years ago but didn't work out.

 

Use to have an incidental one which was 5 yards, and a flagrant which was 15.

 

In regards to the pass interference, I don't think that would work either as there would just be more controversy/rules which is exactly what the NFL doesn't need

[NoSaint]

These talks are tricky because you always want to make the rule more complex to account for more situations (establishing tiers, judging intent)

 

but you rarely want to give the refs even more leeway, or out more difficulty on their plate.

 

sometimes keeping it simple and accepting it’s not perfect but it’s pretty good is a decent approach. I think we have that now. It’ll burn you sometimes but it doesn’t create loopholes for the defense to exploit and it doesn’t make refs guess intent. 

[Schmuggs]

Because the patriots wouldn’t like it. Thats why. 

[MrEpsYtown]

1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Exactly - you basically eliminate the big play - anyone that is beat just tackle the WR.

 

This is especially true at the end of the game - it would have killed the end of the Saints game and probably the Baltimore/Cincinnati game that got us in.

 

Exactly this. It would ruin the game completely. I coach high school football and we teach our kids to commit PI if they get beat. There would be a ton more PI flags. 

[MJS]

Because, like everyone has said forever about this, it takes away the deep ball. No defender will allow a catch over 15 yards. They will just mug their receiver and take the penalty if they even think there is a chance of getting beat.

[Schmuggs]

At least make it reviewable. These refs are seeing money signs. 

[Big Turk]

Because on any long pass the defensive player would be coached to just tackle the receiver if he was beat.

[Koufax]

Just now, matter2003 said:

Because on any long pass the defensive player would be coached to just tackle the receiver if he was beat.

 

This.

 

The stuff you don't like is what happens around the current rule.  If you knew the worst you could get was 15, defensive players would be way more deliberately aggressive and deep passes would go down a TON.  Not what the NFL wants or the fans want.