Change Pass Interference to 15 yd penalty (edited title)

[ProcessTruster]

Just let the head coach's right to challenge a play apply to PI as well.   Just like challenges of ball spotting out of scrum tackle on 4th and inches , PI is as eyeballed judgement call that, given the speed of the game, can be misjudged , with turnover type large consequences.   I wonder why PI is not allowed to be challenged??? 

 

 It wouldn't get out of control, as HCs only have a few precious red flags to use, and would send a message that refs are not the ultimate judge.   

 

I like this bc Bucs did to the Bills exactly what they did to the Packers in the NFC title game last year; they held and interfered multiple times, preventing the Packers WRs from getting to multiple balls and effecting the outcome of that game for sure.  

[Livinginthepast]

8 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Didn't the NFL try that a couple years ago, and abandoned it because they were never, but never, overturning the ruling on the field?  Not once.

 

Edit: yes, they introduced it for the 2019 season and didn't make it permanent

https://www.nfl.com/news/owners-make-pass-interference-non-calls-reviewable-0ap3000001024371

 

 

When another poster mentioned this, I have to admit I had no recollection of this (like a few things pre covid) but was there even one instance where a Bills coach used this challenge? I dont remember it being used at all.  I found this article but like many on the subject, they say the owners "didnt support it"  but it doesn't really explain the reasoning that deeply. 

 

https://www.mlive.com/lions/2020/05/pass-interference-challenges-are-dead-for-the-2020-nfl-season.html

 

Personally I think like some have suggested it might be better to have the officials throw a flag when in doubt and then have the booth official quickly review it to confirm the call. However the CFL have kept their rule in place and it does work, so for the NFL to claim that this kind of rule was unworkable is just stupid. Reminds me of the old days when the CFL allowed 2pt convert attempts yet the NFL resisted it as if it was some sort of outlandish idea

 

 

[shane nelson]

i think 2 PI penalties.  PI 15 yards / PI stopping the player from catching the ball (aka mugging) point of the penalty. 

Also, if the receiver is attempting to get a PI like Sunday, the offensive player gets 10 yard penalty and loss of down.  For years NE and Brady just send receivers deep on 3rd and long and run into defenders in the secondary 

[The Frankish Reich]

I like limiting PI penalties to 25 yards, but doesn’t there also need to be something like the NBA “clear path” foul or the hockey penalty shot? You can’t incentivize a DB to tackle a WR

who’s got him beat 40 yards downfield. And doing that just injects more uncertainty/judgement into the process. 

[Big Turk]

15 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I think it's a good idea.   PI is the only penalty in pro football that awards yardage based on an assumption something would have happened.   Who knows whether the ball would have been caught?   Nobody.  

 

Why don't they give a touchdown if a receiver holds, based on the assumption that but for the hold, the guy would have gone for a TD?   

 

Teams, including the Bills throw deep in part because they know the chances are good they can get a penalty worth 30-40 yards.  I don't like it.  

 

Uhh...because the penalty is against the offense in that situation?

[PrimeTime101]

9 hours ago, pennstate10 said:

Really?

not sure what college games you’re watching. 
Maybe you can give a few examples because I don’t think I’ve seen this all season. 

In College, there are 2 many plays in the game where the WR totally blows away the CB and you see many more uncontested deep balls.

 

When you watch 2 bad teams battle it out in college or 2 really talented teams, one side defense and other side offense... you watch CB's that get beat just haul people on the ground... 

 

At the NFL no matter the teams, there are not nearly as many WR blow out plays where the defender is not even close. 

 

So, you want to see Josh Allen throw the ball 50 yards down the field, Diggs has his man beat and instead of contesting more for the ball he just stops Diggs from getting by him by all means necessary? that is not right either... Let's be practical here... There has to be different levels of PI calls and the Ref will still mess up what call to make... 15 yards or spot foul? then after games we will be saying... "refs should have called it spot foul and not 15 yards"

 

You don't change the call that is broken... NO. You change the morons out there making the call! PERIOD!  I see college refs that are way better than what we have now. IF I worked at McDonalds for example... and I screwed up as often as these refs do in a 4-hour period, would I have a job?

[nucci]

15 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

I think they’re trying to disincentivize dbs just tackling receivers while the ball is in the air to save tds. Which wouldn’t you know it is exactly what happened to diggs in the end zone Sunday 🤣

yet players grab receivers all the time for a 5 yd penalty

[Matt_In_NH]

This could help a little I suppose but does not address the real problem.....inconsistency of calls is the problem.

[Mikie2times]

14 hours ago, pennstate10 said:

Really?

not sure what college games you’re watching. 
Maybe you can give a few examples because I don’t think I’ve seen this all season. 

I would love examples, I haven't seen this once all season

 

8 hours ago, Mickey said:

Interfering with and holding receivers on purpose happens all the time in the NFL.  The notion that for it to be "on purpose" the DB has to blatantly tackle the guy makes no sense.  DB's aren't that stupid, they do their best to disguise it but if they are beaten they purposefully take the foul. That is exactly what the Bucs did to Diggs when they grabbed him by the jersey to keep him from getting to that deep ball.  If they will do it with the current penalty (spot of the catch) then they will certainly do it if you reduce the penalty to 15 yards. 

 

I also don't buy for a moment that players would simply be unable to purposefully decide to take a foul because playing football is too "instinctual".  NBA players will take a a foul when it makes sense, soccer players do it all the time.  I can't count how many times I have seen a lineman hold on to a rusher that blew by him to keep him from killing the QB. 

 

The problem with interference calls is that it happens on sooooo many plays and refs aren't going to call it every play.  That means it all comes down to fairly random judgments and a whole lot of chance.  These plays happen downfield far from where most of the refs are located. They can't see everything.  Making the penalty less severe is not going to help.  

It's your opinion, your examples don't give it any merit, I could easily explain why every situation you're describing is completely different. That said we could do this all day. I'm holding my ground on somebody showing a streaking WR being tackled at the ankles in a college football game. I think if it's such a guaranteed outcome in the NFL, we would see it occasionally. I don't feel you go from never to all the time from CFB to NFL in this area, but again, all are entitled to an opinion on this. It's not something that can be answered so no point in trying. Some good points to both sides on this subject.     

[Buffalo ill]

If one could travel back in time prevent fantasy football from being created, we might still have the glorious nfl rules from the 80s/90s.

[Albany,n.y.]

20 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

I have thought going with the college 15 yard rule was a good idea for many years now.

 

Giving the ball at the spot of the foul is often a gigantic penalty, and you're not sure the player would have caught the ball in the absence of the foul anyway!

 

 

How about having a 2 tier type of penalty.

 

If PI is "egregious" it's the spot of the foul.  I.E., the DB was horribly beaten and tackled the WR to avoid a huge completion.  

 

If not, it's 15 yards.  

 

It would still require the official to exercise subjective discretion (which is a terrible idea) but it might be a sound approach overall.

 

 

Enforce it like the NBA does with flagrant fouls.  When there's a question whether it was egregious, just review it.  If it's egregious it a spot penalty, otherwise 15 yards.  

[Nextmanup]

6 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I like limiting PI penalties to 25 yards, but doesn’t there also need to be something like the NBA “clear path” foul or the hockey penalty shot? You can’t incentivize a DB to tackle a WR

who’s got him beat 40 yards downfield. And doing that just injects more uncertainty/judgement into the process. 

That's why I like my proposal of the 2 tier system, even if it requires the official to exercise discretion, which is in general a bad idea.

 

And actually, I don't think it would be hard to know which category the foul falls into, almost all of the time.

 

I.E., I would suggest we all know, in a second, which foul is a desperate egregious measure and which is the normal type we tend to get now, where the defender is just trying to make an honest effort at a play, but fouled the WR.

 

Failing to turn the DB's head around but otherwise being in pretty good position, but then fouling the WR, for example, would be a 15 yard penalty.

 

Never turning around, being in bad position, and then pushing the WR to the ground prior to the ball getting there would be marked at the spot of the foul.

 

 

[cba fan]

22 hours ago, Jrb1979 said:

If you are talking about rule changes, can we get rid of the fair catch? I watch the CFL a lot and their rule is they have to give the receiving player 5 yards to make a play. 

interesting. NFL you might see different results. Worth experimenting with in preseason.

 

Returners in previous situations when fair catch was an option, is now indicated, wanted, or desired with new halo rule. I think would simply catch ball with no one closer than 5 yards from him and just take a knee. Done deal and safer as no defender gets close like they do right now.  Many times nearly brushing the return guy as he catches it. 

 

It might stop/reduce the holding calls as return team no longer needs to worry about a missed block causing return guy to get blown up and/or a serious injury. This calls for serious consideration i feel. Nothing worse than parade of holds on kicks.

6 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

Uhh...because the penalty is against the offense in that situation?

his point is the wr holding may have prevented a pic 6 by the db

[Buffalo_Stampede]

6 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I like limiting PI penalties to 25 yards, but doesn’t there also need to be something like the NBA “clear path” foul or the hockey penalty shot? You can’t incentivize a DB to tackle a WR

who’s got him beat 40 yards downfield. And doing that just injects more uncertainty/judgement into the process. 

It just doesn't happen often. I don't know why people act like it does. I think I've seen it once and the guy dove like he was diving for a catch and barely got him.

 

The only time a DB will grab or wrap up the WR is early in the route. You actually have to be pretty close to tackle or grab a WR.

 

Maybe I'm just not watching enough college football. I watch a lot of it.

Edited December 15, 2021 by Buffalo_Stampede

[ngbills]

No solution gets this right. Change the rule to 15 and they still get it wrong, just cost less yards. Even if it becomes a sky judge ruling those guys can get it wrong less but how do you determine when you review? On any given play there can be some bumping etc. Do they review every receiver on every pass play? Or review only the plays called then it does not help for no calls like on Diggs.

 

When I get pissed at refs like this week I want them to just get rid of PI altogether. Just let it be a free for all so at least the refs cant impact the outcome. Will change the game quite a bit obviously. You will need big physical WR's and TE's or run plays to create space. 

[Mikie2times]

2 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

It just doesn't happen often. I don't know why people act like it does. I think I've seen it once and the guy dove like he was diving for a catch and barely got him.

 

The only time a DB will grab or wrap up the WR is early in the route. You actually have to be pretty close to tackle or grab a WR.

 

Maybe I'm just not watching enough college football. I watch a lot of it.

Ya, I don't get it. I've watched a dumb amount of CFB this year and every year. You see similar things across both leagues as far as how DB's react to certain situations. You see more physical play close to the end zone or when a player is out of position. You aren't seeing the intent of stopping a pass with a penalty. You're seeing an honest attempt to stop a pass and in some situations that means more contact will occur. I just don't understand how people can think players can react the way they're discussing. It is very hard for a DB to even disengage his man to defend a pass to another WR because in his mind his responsibility is to defend his man. It's instincts when he comes off his man based on the eyes of a QB. He is using instincts to react and this all occurring based on where the QB's head and eyes are, the ball isn't even out yet. Tons of players can't even do this. To think they could allow the ball to come out, then consciously shift from defender mode to tackle drill, be in close enough proximity to even accomplish that. Again, you can't prove this to anybody who disagrees.  If it was so easy to accomplish I would really think college teams would find ways to use it as a competitive advantage by.    

[Beerball]

On 12/14/2021 at 6:46 PM, KzooMike said:

Most of you are probably aware of this but in college football pass interference is a 15 yard penalty. I like that it's a 15 yards penalty. I do not trust the referees ability to judge PI in real life and do not want the risk of a penalty being called that is undetermined in length. If you object I imagine it's most likely out of the fear defenders will start tackling open WR's downfield. I used to think that way, never happens. I can count on one hand how many times I have seen a clearly defeated college player decide that committing a penalty is better than not committing one. No player can react that logically with something so instinctual, in real time, and those speeds. It NEVER happens. 

 

15 Yards, good idea, bad idea?

Good idea, been saying it for years.

 

Another change, screw the half the distance BS. Move the ball to the 2 yard line. Why penalize the offense for being in the red zone?

[Mikie2times]

1 hour ago, Beerball said:

Good idea, been saying it for years.

 

Another change, screw the half the distance BS. Move the ball to the 2 yard line. Why penalize the offense for being in the red zone?

This….👍👍👍

 

Half the distance really pisses me off. 

[Cheektowaga Chad]

If the pass interference penalty got changed to a 15 harder, NFL players would be coached to just haul any receiver down that beats them. Take a 15 yard penalty over a touchdown any day

[Beerball]

8 hours ago, Cheektowaga Chad said:

If the pass interference penalty got changed to a 15 harder, NFL players would be coached to just haul any receiver down that beats them. Take a 15 yard penalty over a touchdown any day

And?