(03-01-2018, 10:00 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I agree with your first point, both penalties should be enforced.

On the second point, how would you suggest they handle that situation differently?  Would you want the recovering team to begin their possession how ever many yards deep in the end zone?

I think the recovering team should get the ball on the 1....

PI is about the only foul that can result in a penalty of more than 15 yards so why subject ONLY db's to this silliness ? 
Think about it.  No other foul can change the outcome of a game more than PI.. Even blatantly tackling and beating up the kicker can only be a 15 yard penalty.. There's got to be some middle ground between a 50 yard ticky tacky pi call and an extremely violent and brutal foul by say, a defensive lineman..  if a wr can swing the game by so much one direction penalizing db's then there should be  some equitable penalty that offensive players can be subjected to to swing it the opposite direction, but  there isn't . I don't know .maybe the qb kicking a defensive player in the nuts? 15 yards per nut?  Getting proof could get kind of freaky, eh?

(03-01-2018, 11:38 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: I would prefer a 15 yard penalties  cause a lot of these are ticky tacky calls and can change the outcome of a game

Meh, we'll see how much you like it when AJ Green has a surefire 40 yard TD and Mike Mitchell gleefully PI's him as blatantly as possible to make sure it's only a 15 yard gain.  This is a rule that will encourage defensive players to clearly and deliberately break rules in order to reduce the damage the offense does.  

It might be amusing in the sense that, much like the NBA, the foul needs to be as blatant as possible in order to be sure it sticks and effectively halts any chance of the offensive player still making the catch and thus declining it.  I just see DBs literally wrapping up and tackling WRs on a semi-regular basis on this one.  Perhaps not.

(03-01-2018, 12:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh, we'll see how much you like it when AJ Green has a surefire 40 yard TD and Mike Mitchell gleefully PI's him as blatantly as possible to make sure it's only a 15 yard gain.  This is a rule that will encourage defensive players to clearly and deliberately break rules in order to reduce the damage the offense does.  

It might be amusing in the sense that, much like the NBA, the foul needs to be as blatant as possible in order to be sure it sticks and effectively halts any chance of the offensive player still making the catch and thus declining it.  I just see DBs literally wrapping up and tackling WRs on a semi-regular basis on this one.  Perhaps not.

Yep, this is my stance as well.  Maybe they could make egregious PI a spot foul, and hand checking/interference where the ball is actually arriving at the point of the foul a 15 yarder.  More gray areas. 

I'd rather see them make D holding a ten yard penalty and no automatic first down. Same with like hands to the face. Why is that a first down?

(03-01-2018, 10:00 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I agree with your first point, both penalties should be enforced.

On the second point, how would you suggest they handle that situation differently?  Would you want the recovering team to begin their possession how ever many yards deep in the end zone?

The only thing I can think of is have the offense get the ball at the 20 with whatever down it is. I just cant fathom how the other team gets the ball when they dont recover. 

(03-01-2018, 11:53 AM)Sled21 Wrote: I think the recovering team should get the ball on the 1....

So, do you also feel that teams that down a kickoff or punt in the end zone should take possession at the 1?  Because it's essentially the same thing, a live ball fielded in the end zone, but not advanced into the field of play.

(03-01-2018, 12:55 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: The only thing I can think of is have the offense get the ball at the 20 with whatever down it is. I just cant fathom how the other team gets the ball when they dont recover. 

Because the ball is not only out of bounds.. (o recovers)  but now has gone past the goalline.  So there is no where for the refs to set it up as you would recover where it went out of bounds...  This is a TURNOVER..... so the other team gets the ball with a Touchback.

the offense shouldn't get the ball back because they sucked enough to fumble it out of the endzone

(03-01-2018, 01:10 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, do you also feel that teams that down a kickoff or punt in the end zone should take possession at the 1?  Because it's essentially the same thing, a live ball fielded in the end zone, but not advanced into the field of play.

No, I don't feel it is even close to the same thing. A kick that is received in the end zone, is the guy that catches it's choice to run it our or to take the 25 instead. A ball fumbled into the end zone and recovered by the defense, can be returned out of the end zone if the guy that recovers it can manage it, if he gets downed, then the closest place to put it on the field of play is the 1. 

(03-01-2018, 02:07 PM)Sled21 Wrote: No, I don't feel it is even close to the same thing. A kick that is received in the end zone, is the guy that catches it's choice to run it our or to take the 25 instead. A ball fumbled into the end zone and recovered by the defense, can be returned out of the end zone if the guy that recovers it can manage it, if he gets downed, then the closest place to put it on the field of play is the 1. 

It is exactly a similar situation.  A player fielding a live ball, making a strategic decision to down the ball, based upon the odds of gaining better field position from attempting to run it out.

(03-01-2018, 01:52 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Because the ball is not only out of bounds.. (o recovers)  but now has gone past the goalline.  So there is no where for the refs to set it up as you would recover where it went out of bounds...  This is a TURNOVER..... so the other team gets the ball with a Touchback.

the offense shouldn't get the ball back because they sucked enough to fumble it out of the endzone

So if you suck enough to fumble out of bounds at the half yard line , should the defense get the ball? I suggested the offense get the ball at the 20 with the down counting and no first down. There is no reason for the other team to get the ball back when they do not recover.

(03-01-2018, 02:59 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: So if you suck enough to fumble out of bounds at the half yard line , should the defense get the ball?  I suggested the offense get the ball at the 20 with the down counting and no first down. There is no reason for the other team to get the ball back when they do not recover.

1/2 yard line is still in the field of play... Endzone isn't  its pretty simple

(03-01-2018, 02:25 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: It is exactly a similar situation.  A player fielding a live ball, making a strategic decision to down the ball, based upon the odds of gaining better field position from attempting to run it out.

The NFL is going to stick to giving them the 25 for "safety" reasons on a kickoff. Giving the recovering defense the ball on the 1 pretty much means take it out as far as you can.... also, if no one recovers a fumble in the end zone, I think the offense should keep it just as though they fumbled it out of bounds.

(03-01-2018, 03:25 PM)Sled21 Wrote: The NFL is going to stick to giving them the 25 for "safety" reasons on a kickoff. Giving the recovering defense the ball on the 1 pretty much means take it out as far as you can.... also, if no one recovers a fumble in the end zone, I think the offense should keep it just as though they fumbled it out of bounds.

only if the ball then gets spotted on the offenses 1 yard line (not the defenses 1 yard line)  so they gotta start over.

(03-01-2018, 12:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Meh, we'll see how much you like it when AJ Green has a surefire 40 yard TD and Mike Mitchell gleefully PI's him as blatantly as possible to make sure it's only a 15 yard gain.  This is a rule that will encourage defensive players to clearly and deliberately break rules in order to reduce the damage the offense does.  

On the other hand, there is still the "defenseless receiver" and "unnecessary roughness" penalties to worry about, though those are also only 15 unless the NFL allows penalties to be stacked.

I'm still torn on this but I am leaning towards being against this change.

I admit I am not as concerned about DBs mugging receivers as I am about what is already happening - teams deliberately designing plays to draw PI flags. The Pats do it a lot and so do the Stealers - heave it deep and trust in the refs to call PI if the pass is successfully defended.

(03-01-2018, 04:38 PM)PhilHos Wrote: On the other hand, there is still the "defenseless receiver" and "unnecessary roughness" penalties to worry about, though those are also only 15 unless the NFL allows penalties to be stacked.

I'm still torn on this but I am leaning towards being against this change.

I don't mean it like they'll try to kill the WR, but it'll be pretty tiresome seeing DB's gleefully drape themselves over WRs.  Maybe that wouldn't happen, it's just speculation but I know 15 yards isn't exactly a long bomb of a gain for an offense these days.

(03-01-2018, 03:20 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: 1/2 yard line is still in the field of play... Endzone isn't  its pretty simple

Im aware of what an Endzone is and isn't. I'm also aware that anywhere else on the field the defense has to recover the ball to get possession. I understand the offense's own endzone you cant get any farther back so penalizing the team with a safety and the ball makes sense. 

I think it will help the Bengals because Kirkpatrick's penalty yards will drop, but he'll continue a lot of drives for the other team.

The offense will still get an automatic 1st down, so that and 15 yards is still a big penalty on a defense.

I'm in favor of the change.

Strangely enough within this debate about defensive backs mugging receivers it works the same way for every team (or at least in theory). Unless you're going to acknowledge that yes, refs can and do throw games to favor certain teams over others you can't really make the claim that any particular team is going to get the built in advantage through the rule change. 
If the steelers or pats can have their db's tackle receivers to prevent TDs then obviously the Bengals can too.. 
What would be interesting is to find out what teams get the most PI calls in their favor and is it consistent year in, year out? 
It seems to me that it might just eliminate some of the mystery PI calls that often swing game outcomes so drastically. 
How many times have you watched a game where you thought the Bengals had the game in the bag only to see some mysterious PI call at the last minute. The line of scrimmage suddenly goes from our 33 yardline to  their 8 yardline and nobody actually caught the ball? You just can't get much murkier or fishier than that. And yes, murkier and fishier are technical terms specific to football that result in more new TV sales because of blunt objects being thrown at screens than any other single factor. .