Ref on illegal contact: "It's an offensive game."

OhExaulted1 said:

Because it makes the games suck to watch. A flag on every play? I'd piss my pants before the 1st quarter was over.

Click to expand...

Just like with the other rule enforcement implementations, the players will adjust and the game will proceed on as if nothing has happened.

You may need to stretch out your bladder during the first few week adjustment period however.

Bobs My Uncle said:

Just like with the other rule enforcement implementations, the players will adjust and the game will proceed on as if nothing has happened.

You may need to stretch out your bladder during the first few week adjustment period however.

Click to expand...

Hi Neville Chamberlain!! Yeah, like that rule invoked in the Jets game last season. The Jets push the pile and no call. There was never any call made on pushing the pile in NFL history . Then the Jets miss a FG in OT and "pushing the pile!!!!!!!!" is invoked for the first time and NEVER SINCE!

Right, the players adjusted ...to forfeiting HOME FIELD and going to Denver to play the AFCCG.

Apparently transforming the NFL from a sport with 17-13 scores to one with 27-24 scores was not enough for those at 345 Park Avenue in NYC.

Now they want to keep pace with the Arena League and Baylor, and have 63-55 ball games.

Figures they didn't change this rule in 2011 and 2012 when it would of probably guaranteed us two Superbowls. No, they change it when the Patriots switch to defense

Joker said:

Hi Neville Chamberlain!! Yeah, like that rule invoked in the Jets game last season. The Jets push the pile and no call. There was never any call made on pushing the pile in NFL history . Then the Jets miss a FG in OT and "pushing the pile!!!!!!!!" is invoked for the first time and NEVER SINCE!

Right, the players adjusted ...to forfeiting HOME FIELD and going to Denver to play the AFCCG.

Click to expand...

Well, you are talking about a different thing here .........

PATS16N0 said:

Figures they didn't change this rule in 2011 and 2012 when it would of probably guaranteed us two Superbowls. No, they change it when the Patriots switch to defense

Click to expand...

I'd love to hear the rationale for this... Oh well the product is already garbage, I guess hot garbage won't be much worse.

Bobs My Uncle said:

Well, you are talking about a different thing here .........

Click to expand...

Am I ? One team gets flagged 20 times for illegal contact while the opponent gets flagged twice...that WILL happen. Just like "not pushing the pile!...OK...NOW pushing the pile!"...you are naive beyond understanding if you think this will NOT occur, will not create controversy and will not impact outcomes of games.This new rule is not actually a "rule" it's an"unrule".They intend to enforce a rule on the books that has been untenable since it came into existence.

Joker said:

Am I ? One team gets flagged 20 times for illegal contact while the opponent gets flagged twice...that WILL happen. Just like "not pushing the pile!...OK...NOW pushing the pile!"...you are naive beyond understanding if you think this will NOT occur, will not create controversy and will not impact outcomes of games.This new rule is not actually a "rule" it's an"unrule".They intend to enforce a rule on the books that has been untenable since it came into existence.

Click to expand...

What the refs do when it comes to rule implementation is another matter altogether. Just like instances where 1 team gets 12 holding calls while another gets 1.

Bobs My Uncle said:

What the refs do when it comes to rule implementation is another matter altogether. Just like instances where 1 team gets 12 holding calls while another gets 1.

Click to expand...

Link to such examples?

While number of penalties might never reach the levels joker stated pass interference has already lead to shenanigans like this:
New England Patriots at Indianapolis Colts - November 4th, 2007 - Box Score | Pro Football Reference

It's hugely worrisome that the competition committee has once again come to the aid of horse face. This is especially true after the blind eye turned to the crazy amount of PI being let slide against the 2007 team down the stretch and in the POs. I respect Peyton, but the league acting like a douchy dad makes it hard.

What morons thought that emphasizing a game changing aspect of refereeing that was already extremely subjective to start with was a good idea?

(apologies to the morons posting here, I don't mean you)

Bobs My Uncle said:

True I suppose, but any possible downgrade in their performance, due to the rule emphasis, will surely be offset by the benefit this gives our passing offense, led by perhaps the GOAT at the QB spot.

I can see a team like Seattle or SF (which relies on strong defense) being peeved but the last thing I'm going to complain about are rules which make, what is easily the strength of this team, even stronger.

Click to expand...

This would make more sense if history hasn't shown that some teams will benefit from it more than other teams will. It's a subjective call and rule change that's only being made because the casual fan (and fantasy football fan) enjoys offense. It's also unnecessary and effectively neuters what would could be the team's second biggest strength now: the physical secondary. As I said before, I hope the team doesn't tuck it's ball sack between it's legs and keeps doing what the Seahawks did. Dare them to flag every passing play. The refs will then have a choice: turn the game into a joke or let them play. My gut tells me they'll choose the latter.

KontradictioN said:

Dare them to flag every passing play. The refs will then have a choice: turn the game into a joke or let them play. My gut tells me they'll choose the latter.

Click to expand...

This would be an interesting start to the season. Have a visiting offense "march" down the field due to a series of PI calls that would not have been called last year. See how the officials respond to the outrage in the stands.

ThatllMoveTheChains!!! said:

Link to such examples?

While number of penalties might never reach the levels joker stated pass interference has already lead to shenanigans like this http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200711040clt.htm?mobile=false

It's hugely worrisome that the competition committee has once again come to the aid of horse face. This is especially true after the blind eye turned to the crazy amount of PI being let slide against the 2007 team down the stretch and in the POs. I respect Peyton, but the league acting like a douchy dad makes it hard.

Click to expand...

Mine was an extreme example much like Joker's was and not indicative of a specific and actual game. The reasons for why such extreme examples transpire in a game is an issue beyond a simple rules emphasis and not something easily debated in this forum.

Admittedly there are a number of reasons for why emphasizing a rule might lend favor to one team versus another but I highly doubt this was done specifically to favor, say Peyton and his Broncos, over any other team. That is just a sour grapes argument IMHO.

In fact, for reasons I explained previously, I think such emphasis will ultimately benefit a team like the Pats moreso than it does the Broncos.

KontradictioN said:

This would make more sense if history hasn't shown that some teams will benefit from it more than other teams will. It's a subjective call and rule change that's only being made because the casual fan (and fantasy football fan) enjoys offense. It's also unnecessary and effectively neuters what would could be the team's second biggest strength now: the physical secondary. As I said before, I hope the team doesn't tuck it's ball sack between it's legs and keeps doing what the Seahawks did. Dare them to flag every passing play. The refs will then have a choice: turn the game into a joke or let them play. My gut tells me they'll choose the latter.

Click to expand...

The proof will be in the pudding as they say. Time will tell if such emphasizes will be an enjoyment or not. Likely depends on which side of the (offense or defense) fence one sits.

Either way, I am very confidant that any rule emphasis on this matter will be a benefit, and not a hindrance, to this team.

Bobs My Uncle said:

The proof will be in the pudding as they say. Time will tell if such emphasizes will be an enjoyment or not. Likely depends on which side of the (offense or defense) fence one sits.

Either way, I am very confidant that any rule emphasis on this matter will be a benefit, and not a hindrance, to this team.

Click to expand...

The pudding has already been delivered and the proof has already been shown. Faceguarding in the 2006 AFCCG, anyone? How about the Colts game in 2008? Again, some teams will benefit from this more than others. It's a subjective call already that's due to get much more ticky tack. Yes, we have the GOAT at QB. We also have the best secondary that we've had since the dynasty years. While it may help Brady (and how much is up for debate) it will also hinder our secondary, which is and has been among the most aggressive in the NFL. It's a terrible point of emphasis that, frankly, is not needed. Fantasy football has done just fine over the last two years even as defenses were getting more physical again.

Seacoast Fan said:

I don't necessarily disagree but one correction .... It's not fantasy football driving this. It's TV ratings. And, every owner, including Kraft is complicit.

So long as TV ratings continue to go up they will continue to legislate against the D so as to produce more scoring which, they believe, begets more ratings.

Someone pointed to the NBA in an earlier post, and I agree, it is the same mindset. The NBA wants spectacular dunks , so they allow guys to basically travel from mid-court. I can't watch that crap anymore because of it (well, among other reasons, too.)

Click to expand...

But the Golden Era of the NBA (1980-2000) started when teams started to play defense instead of waving at players as they went to the basket. Look at average scores in 1975 when the pro game was about to die.

You just watch. The second Peyton retires, defense will start to be allowed again.

Bobs My Uncle said:

Mine was an extreme example much like Joker's was and not indicative of a specific and actual game. The reasons for why such extreme examples transpire in a game is an issue beyond a simple rules emphasis and not something easily debated in this forum.

Admittedly there are a number of reasons for why emphasizing a rule might lend favor to one team versus another but I highly doubt this was done specifically to favor, say Peyton and his Broncos, over any other team. That is just a sour grapes argument IMHO.

In fact, for reasons I explained previously, I think such emphasis will ultimately benefit a team like the Pats moreso than it does the Broncos.

Click to expand...

The rest of us remember the last emphasis.

Sicilian said:

He's right. Having games decided by ticky-tack penalties that didn't actually impact a play IS pretty offensive.

Click to expand...

So is letting a guy get raped on his way downfield and the refs not throwing the flag - or, as we all know, throwing it and picking it up.

Bobs My Uncle said:

I don't get it .... why is anyone unhappy about this?

Click to expand...

People in this forum need to feel persecuted, that everyone is out to get them, the league the media the fans are all conspired against the Patriots and in favor of Peyton Manning. It's part of fandom.

The best secondaries in the league will still be the best secondaries in the league. The best quarterbacks will still be the best quarterbacks.