I think they should allow a coach to challenge anything including holding calls.

But limit to 2 per game and a third if you get one of your first two correct.

For example, do you remember the Justin Smith unnecessary roughness call against I think Tampa Bay.

Or some of the unnecessary roughness calls on QBs last year.

The real answer is full time refs who are former players and in good enough shape to keep up.

They should be studying game film every week with centralized instruction to try to get more consistent calls between crews and even during games with the same crew.

NFL refs are the worst but because they are part time the deck is stacked against them.

Why is the billion dollar NFL too cheap to have full-time refs???

I suppose the spirit of competition demands every call is right but damn that means more commercials.

I just don't like that this might slow the game down which in my opinion has been slowed down enough.

Just wish we had better referees that could get the call right in the first place.

Saints got screwed over and i expected this to happen after that though.

(03-27-2019, 03:15 PM)bengals67 Wrote: I think they should allow a coach to challenge anything including holding calls.

But limit to 2 per game and a third if you get one of your first two correct.

For example, do you remember the Justin Smith unnecessary roughness call against I think Tampa Bay.

Or some of the unnecessary roughness calls on QBs last year.

The real answer is full time refs who are former players and in good enough shape to keep up.

They should be studying game film every week with centralized instruction to try to get more consistent calls between crews and even during games with the same crew.

NFL refs are the worst but because they are part time the deck is stacked against them.

Why is the billion dollar NFL too cheap to have full-time refs???

I do like your idea here cause it rewards the teams and coaches when the coaches get the challenges right...

It also rewards the refs who do a good job.

Imagine if we had this when we played the Steelers the last couple of years.

(03-27-2019, 11:45 AM)Devils Advocate Wrote: Aren’t PI’s defined though?

Oh, I'm sure they are, I just don't believe any language can unambiguously solve any situation - rather that there's a lot of grey area which makes it a judgment call.

Was the player touched, was his ability to catch hindered by it, was it an intentional contact or did it occur when both went after the ball...? I often see commentators being unsure, and I'd guess that's because it's a matter of interpretation in many cases. 

I'm surprised to see soo many opinions on concern over length of game vs getting calls right.

I think something like you can challenge 1 PI call a game would be reasonable. What does the evidence look like to overturn it though?

(03-27-2019, 08:53 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I'm surprised to see soo many opinions on concern over length of game vs getting calls right.

I think something like you can challenge 1 PI call a game would be reasonable. What does the evidence look like to overturn it though?

With me it is not concern of length of game it is slowing the game down.

I could get on board with that one PI challenge a game.

I just don't know if it is needed except on rare occasions like the Rams/Saints game.

Just get the call right is all i want.

(03-27-2019, 08:57 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Just get the call right is all i want.

Maybe the video refs should initiate the review call on PI and non-calls, not the coaches' challenge. That's how they do the video review in soccer. And while that's in no way perfect, blatantly wrong calls usually get caught, and obvious errors like in the Saints Rams game could easily be overturned by those guys.

(03-27-2019, 09:02 PM)hollodero Wrote: Maybe the video refs should initiate the review call on PI and non-calls, not the coaches' challenge. That's how they do the video review in soccer. And while that's in no way perfect, blatantly wrong calls usually get caught, and obvious errors like in the Saints Rams game could easily be overturned by those guys.

That might be the best route.

(03-27-2019, 07:44 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: I had to look this word up.

As for the new rule, it is going to make games longer as I suspect almost every closely defended pass play will end up being reviewed.

Probably an egregious vocabulary failure here if you had to look it up, but I miss a few myself here and there. 

(03-27-2019, 12:21 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Usually Mike is a 100% wrong on things but this he got right. Judgement calls should not be reviewable period and this will yet again make playing defensive back that much harder.  They are overreacting over one play. 
Also why not have Facemask calls be reviewable because they missed one on the Saints on the previous drive.

It has nothing to do whether he is wrong or right.  Personally I don't think reviewing judgement calls is a good idea either.  But the league is moving in a more progressive direction using the technology available, and MB once again can't see the forest through the trees.

Heck, I don't like my kids music either but I'm smart enough to pick my battles.  Sometimes you have to be progressive.  MB is not.  Of the 31 other owners, do you really think all of them think this is best?  I think not but you must change with the times.

I don't give a crap if it makes the games 5 hours long, just as long as i don't have to hear or see bitching about missed or bad penalty calls. People whine and complain about bad officiating influencing the outcome of games, well the NFL is doing something about it.

(03-27-2019, 09:41 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Rules/Policies are created to fix past mistakes and prevent them from happening again. There is no doubt a playoff game win and Super Bowl trip was handed over to the Rams. This new rule will prevent it.


Let's see how they enforce it. My guess is coached better have clear cases or they lose a valuable challenge and time out. I think all plays should be reviewable (OL holding too), but any judgment call will get tremendous scrutiny to be over turned in my opinion.


I do see a potential issue of both teams challenging the same play. How many times have you seen a Holding or PI call made against a defense for example, only to see on replay the receiver was the one guilty. What to they do if they review it and reverse a defensive PI call, then the opposing coach can throw the flag for the offensive PI as his coaches get 3 to 5 minutes to look at in detail.

You can almost envision a scenario where it becomes perpetual challenge flags, challenging the challenge of a challenge until it devolves to the point everyone forgets the original reason for the original flag.. Five hours later the game continues and the second play of the game commences.. 
"Oh wait..what were we arguing about?" 
Part of me agrees with MB on this..just let them play the damned game instead of letting it devolve into one big game of litigation, but on the other hand I simply do not inherently trust the league to make the right calls. There's always going to be the sneaking hunch that the league is going to make calls that puts the favored team ahead of actually making the correct call. Every call can potentially be questioned and every controversial call in particular will be litigated endlessly on youtube videos. Opinions are like a**holes. Everyone has one and everyone's stinks. 

(03-28-2019, 09:02 AM)Daddy-O Wrote: It has nothing to do whether he is wrong or right.  Personally I don't think reviewing judgement calls is a good idea either.  But the league is moving in a more progressive direction using the technology available, and MB once again can't see the forest through the trees.

Heck, I don't like my kids music either but I'm smart enough to pick my battles.  Sometimes you have to be progressive.  MB is not.  Of the 31 other owners, do you really think all of them think this is best?  I think not but you must change with the times.

Being progressive just to be progressive is stupid. 

(03-28-2019, 03:02 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Being progressive just to be progressive is stupid. 

And can be regressive lol

(03-27-2019, 12:08 PM)NKURyan Wrote: Which is totally realistic as the game shifts to being more and more geared towards offense. Did you lose the coin toss against the Patriots, Saints, or Chiefs? Congratulations, you most likely just lost the game.

I fail to see the harm in allowing the other team a possession to match the touchdown, especially since the game is pretty much guaranteed to be an exciting one if it's made it to that point.

I don't see that it has caused the better team to lose up to this point, so why fix something that isn't broken?

(03-28-2019, 09:25 AM)yellowxdiscipline Wrote: I don't give a crap if it makes the games 5 hours long, just as long as i don't have to hear or see bitching about missed or bad penalty calls. People whine and complain about bad officiating influencing the outcome of games, well the NFL is doing something about it.

Won't it just be another bad official reviewing it, using his own subjective judgement on the call?

Just goes to show, Sean Payton, if you whine and cry loud enough and hard enough, you will get your way.  Is it retroactive to last year and are you now playing in last year's SB?

(03-29-2019, 10:39 AM)McC Wrote: Won't it just be another bad official reviewing it, using his own subjective judgement on the call?

Well, he would have the replay in slow motion to make that determination, which overall will lead to better calls. I don't think one needs to turn all cynical about that.

(03-29-2019, 10:39 AM)McC Wrote: Just goes to show, Sean Payton, if you whine and cry loud enough and hard enough, you will get your way.  Is it retroactive to last year and are you now playing in last year's SB?

As a more or less neutral watcher, I whined and cried too. It hurt many football fans, not just Sean Payton.

(03-29-2019, 11:30 AM)hollodero Wrote: Well, he would have the replay in slow motion to make that determination, which overall will lead to better calls. I don't think one needs to turn all cynical about that.



As a more or less neutral watcher, I whined and cried too. It hurt many football fans, not just Sean Payton.

I don't disagree.  But he was the one who wouldn't let it go and he has enough cache in the league to make it happen,, and it happened.

As to cynical, I'm trying to remember the last time a big rule change outside safety issues was a hit, so to speak.

And the very fact that they didn't make that call says it all about officiating.  So many calls are judgement calls and no two guys call it alike.

(03-26-2019, 11:16 PM)NKURyan Wrote: Why they won't agree to guarantee every team at least one possession in overtime, I will never understand.

Well defense's gotta do their job too.