NFL may eliminate "spot foul" part of defensive pass interference

[*PhilHos*]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000917735/article/nfl-could-change-defensive-pi-to-15yard-penalty

Quote:One of the surprising proposals offered by the NFL Competition Committee is to change the penalty for defensive pass interference from a spot foul to a 15-yard penalty at most, NFL Network's Judy Battista reported Tuesday. This is more in line with how the game is refereed on the collegiate level.

Changing the pass interference penalty is on its face a defense-first measure. Offenses would have far less to gain by "chucking it up" to try and draw a penalty from a grabby defensive back downfield.

Defensive pass interference was called 266 times in 2017, per Pro Football Reference, or more than once per game for an average of 18.09 yards per game. It was the third-most frequent flag behind offensive holding and false start.

In addition, and perhaps as a counter-measure, the league is expected to increase "illegal contact" calls as an effort to limit the amount of hand-fighting.

Two questions:
1) Do you support this rule change?

2) What effects, if any, would it have on Lazor's gameplans this season? Or on Merv's coaching style?

[BengalHawk62]

Yes I am in full support of this proposal. This is one of the most subjective penalties in the league and too many outcomes of plays are placed in the ref’s hands as is. This was one of the biggest penalties of them all. It gave all the advantages to the offense. Being a defensive guy, yes I wholeheartedly back this proposal.

As far as to question #2.....I’m clueless.

[*Go Cards*]

All for it but the elite QB's like Brady will still get the call.

[shanebo]

I don't support this proposed rule change in the least, as I think it will result in a lot more intentional pass interference by DBs -- anytime a DB is beat by 15 yards or more, ball is in the air, he can tackle the WR pre-catch and it's a win. More thuggery than skill. You already see this to a certain extent in college and in the end zone in the NFL, followed by the obligatory color commentator remark "good defensive play, better than a huge gain/touchdown." Meanwhile I'm fuming b/c my team's WR just got destroyed by a dirty DB ... IMO the only reason this rule works in college is because college WRs are generally more open than NFL WRs -- often the DBs can't get to them to trip/tackle them before the ball gets there. That said, I doubt this rule passes because it runs contrary to the focus on offense and scoring in today's NFL.

Re No. 2 - I think Belicheck and the better coaches/coordinators will tell their DBs to interfere whenever they feel they're beat long. I'm guessing we'll see the Pats, Steelers, Eagles, and Vikings doing this from the outset, virtually eliminating long TDs against them. Merv won't get it for at least 2-3 years, though.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(02-28-2018, 03:11 PM)shanebo Wrote: I don't support this proposed rule change in the least, as I think it will result in a lot more intentional pass interference by DBs -- anytime a DB is beat by 15 yards or more, ball is in the air, he can tackle the WR pre-catch and it's a win.  More thuggery than skill.  You already see this to a certain extent in college and in the end zone in the NFL, followed by the obligatory color commentator remark "good defensive play, better than a huge gain/touchdown."  Meanwhile I'm fuming b/c my team's WR just got destroyed by a dirty DB ...  IMO the only reason this rule works in college is because college WRs are generally more open than NFL WRs -- often the DBs can't get to them to trip/tackle them before the ball gets there.  That said, I doubt this rule passes because it runs contrary to the focus on offense and scoring in today's NFL.  

Re No. 2 - I think Belicheck and the better coaches/coordinators will tell their DBs to interfere whenever they feel they're beat long.  I'm guessing we'll see the Pats, Steelers, Eagles, and Vikings doing this from the outset, virtually eliminating long TDs against them.  Merv won't get it for at least 2-3 years, though.

At first i thought i supported the change but you talked me out of it Shanebo, good job man.

No thanks, i know some of these calls drive me nuts but if DB's are just going to intentionally interfere with Receivers i don't like it.

[CJD]

This will make grabbing and pushing WAY more common haha.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(02-28-2018, 03:24 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: This will make grabbing and pushing WAY more common haha.

Sounds like more fights. We could go the NHL route and just let'em go at it.

AJ Green would love this.

[shanebo]

(02-28-2018, 03:20 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: At first i thought i supported the change but you talked me out of it Shanebo, good job man.

No thanks, i know some of these calls drive me nuts but if DB's are just going to intentionally interfere with Receivers i don't like it.

LOL.  I thought I was OK with it at first, too, then I started discussing it with a buddy -- 20 minutes and 4 beers later, we were both against it ...

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(02-28-2018, 03:57 PM)shanebo Wrote: LOL.  I thought I was OK with it at first, too, then I started discussing it with a buddy -- 20 minutes and 4 beers later, we were both against it ...

Yeah man, gotta think about these things ha ha

Been pissed off how many damn times with these calls giving team's games but it really is on the refs calling it wrong, not the rule.

[*wildcats forever*]

(02-28-2018, 03:11 PM)shanebo Wrote: I don't support this proposed rule change in the least, as I think it will result in a lot more intentional pass interference by DBs -- anytime a DB is beat by 15 yards or more, ball is in the air, he can tackle the WR pre-catch and it's a win.  More thuggery than skill.  You already see this to a certain extent in college and in the end zone in the NFL, followed by the obligatory color commentator remark "good defensive play, better than a huge gain/touchdown."  Meanwhile I'm fuming b/c my team's WR just got destroyed by a dirty DB ...  IMO the only reason this rule works in college is because college WRs are generally more open than NFL WRs -- often the DBs can't get to them to trip/tackle them before the ball gets there.  That said, I doubt this rule passes because it runs contrary to the focus on offense and scoring in today's NFL.  

Re No. 2 - I think Belicheck and the better coaches/coordinators will tell their DBs to interfere whenever they feel they're beat long.  I'm guessing we'll see the Pats, Steelers, Eagles, and Vikings doing this from the outset, virtually eliminating long TDs against them.  Merv won't get it for at least 2-3 years, though.

^this^

[CKwi88]

I disagree with it. It's a tough riddle to solve though, so I see why this was floated out there.

I think that PI calls should be treated like TDs in that they should be confirmed by a centralized review system in NY. But then you're stopping the game for even more reviews, which will also tick off viewers.

ItsI tough.

[sandwedge]

(02-28-2018, 03:11 PM)shanebo Wrote: I don't support this proposed rule change in the least, as I think it will result in a lot more intentional pass interference by DBs -- anytime a DB is beat by 15 yards or more, ball is in the air, he can tackle the WR pre-catch and it's a win.  More thuggery than skill.  You already see this to a certain extent in college and in the end zone in the NFL, followed by the obligatory color commentator remark "good defensive play, better than a huge gain/touchdown."  Meanwhile I'm fuming b/c my team's WR just got destroyed by a dirty DB ...  IMO the only reason this rule works in college is because college WRs are generally more open than NFL WRs -- often the DBs can't get to them to trip/tackle them before the ball gets there.  That said, I doubt this rule passes because it runs contrary to the focus on offense and scoring in today's NFL.  

Re No. 2 - I think Belicheck and the better coaches/coordinators will tell their DBs to interfere whenever they feel they're beat long.  I'm guessing we'll see the Pats, Steelers, Eagles, and Vikings doing this from the outset, virtually eliminating long TDs against them.  Merv won't get it for at least 2-3 years, though.

I either disagree with what you are saying or confused to what you are saying? It's still 15 yds either way under the new proposal if I grab the WR at 10 yds or 40 yds. Not sure how that is win?  I see it the other way. How many times has a game been decided by a ticky tack PI on a long ball that wasn't even going to be close to completed and the offense gets the ball inside the 10?

[Joelist]

I am going to say I agree with the proposal. The PI rules are foggy in the first place and you even have teams nowadays that deliberately play to those spot foul rules by throwing it up knowing the foggy nature of the call means that if they get the call it is a BIG gift (Pats and Stealers are notorious for this play).

[BengalHawk62]

(02-28-2018, 04:23 PM)sandwedge Wrote: I either disagree with what you are saying or confused to what you are saying? It's still 15 yds either way under the new proposal if I grab the WR at 10 yds are 40 yds. Not sure how that is win?  I see it the other way. How many times has a game been decided by a ticky tack PI on a long ball that wasn't even going to be close to completed and the offense gets the ball inside the 10?

(02-28-2018, 04:42 PM)Joelist Wrote: I am going to say I agree with the proposal. The PI rules are foggy in the first place and you even have teams nowadays that deliberately play to those spot foul rules by throwing it up knowing the foggy nature of the call means that if they get the call it is a BIG gift (Pats and Stealers are notorious for this play).

This.  ^^^^  The penalty of Pass Interference is too subjective to warrant a free 50 yard play.  Just chuck the ball to the endzone and hope to god the ref see's some hand fighting to throw the flag.  Outcomes of games are unfairly decided by the refs in these situations. 

[TheUberHuber]

He'll to the double no

It would be pi all day long if the receiver even remotely has the db beat...

If anything make it more than 15 yards. Or differentiate between flagrant and incidentals. If the db obviously interferes because he was beat for td then it should be spot foul.

[Millhouse]

Generally I prefer all NFL rules over their counter-part college rules when they differ, like overtime. But never been a big fan of a spot foul past 15 yards.

[bengals67]

How about adopt the change and eject a CB who is called for PI two times in a game?

[Benton]

(02-28-2018, 02:27 PM)PhilHos Wrote: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000917735/article/nfl-could-change-defensive-pi-to-15yard-penalty

Two questions:
1) Do you support this rule change?

2) What effects, if any, would it have on Lazor's gameplans this season? Or on Merv's coaching style?

1- without over thinking it, yeah. I don’t see a huge downside, but I’d rather it be 10 yards.
2- I’ve always felt (correctly or not) that part of the reason were too soft sometimes or give up a few big plays is because the players feel like they can’t make a mistake. That’s the only reason I can see for defenders watching guys run the ball into the end zone. Maybe this will change that mentality, which I’m guessing comes from Marvin.

[McC]

(02-28-2018, 05:03 PM)TheUberHuber Wrote: He'll to the double no

It would be pi all day long if the receiver even remotely has the db beat...

If anything make it more than 15 yards. Or differentiate between flagrant and incidentals. If the db obviously interferes because he was beat for td then it should be spot foul.

This might be a solution even if it is one more subjective decision for refs to  make.

[McC]

Personally, I don't see PI penalties as much of a big deal as finally defining what the hell is a catch and what isn't, especially on a scoring play.