Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis

[Patjew]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

Obviously you don't know what flagrant means. It would be when the defender is completely smoked and interferes with the receiver on purpose instead of the incidental ones down field. The NBA doesn't have a problem with it.

Once you start trying to judge intent, things get very hairy.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

That would be a disaster because then every single PI call would generate endless debate on "that should've/not have been flagrant!"

I have to disagree 100%.. In fact, I think that, as fans, we'd be more forgiving on the calls. And, in all honesty, it's fairly easy to tell what's flagrant and what isn't.

People said that we'd see CBs abusing WRs with the change in the push out rules. That didn't happen. In fact, there was only one game where I saw it happen this year.

And who cares if it stirs up "endless debate" amongst the fans... If anything, that would be a good thing...

In fact, one way to ensure that the ref gets it right is to have someone reviewing all the "flagrant" PIs... and if it IS, then its a spot. and If not, then its 15 yards.. So the refs could get HELP on it..

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

Once you start trying to judge intent, things get very hairy.

That's what they said about the pushing out of bounds rule. And it didn't materialize the way they predicted...

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

That's what they said about the pushing out of bounds rule. And it didn't materialize the way they predicted...

Actually, it has materialized as many predicted. The pushing out of bounds rule has been terrible for the game. Of course, the old rule was terrible for the game, too. It's a case of both tested options being crappy.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

Just like it is in College Football . . . NOT.

We must watch different college football.....

 

[Hardboiled]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

That's what they said about the pushing out of bounds rule. And it didn't materialize the way they predicted...

What does judging intent have to do with out of bounds? Wasn't the old out-of-bounds rule about whether a receiver could have landed in bounds if not pushed/hit by a defender? How did intent factor in?

 

[unoriginal]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

Just like it is in College Football . . . NOT.

In College Football its always a spot foul that can't exceed 15 yards.

 

[Patjew]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

That's what they said about the pushing out of bounds rule. And it didn't materialize the way they predicted...

I'm not sure I understand the rule you're talking about.

 

[PatsFanStnfrd]

Why isn't someone asking why Polian is allowed to preside over the Competition Committee where he can cherrypick which rules deserve to be emphasized and design new rules to aid his club, the Colts? Isn't it like having the fox guard the chicken coop?

Perhaps the NFL should consider term limits -- and have Polian "promoted" to emeritus status.

 

[FalconHeavy]

Why isn't someone asking why Polian is allowed to preside over the Competition Committee where he can cherrypick which rules deserve to be emphasized and design new rules to aid his club, the Colts? Isn't it like having the fox guard the chicken coop?

Perhaps the NFL should consider term limits -- and have Polian "promoted" to emeritus status.

This is one of the long standing questions that I have. Are these positions permanent ? If so why and it makes more sense now that it should not.

Get the A**** hole out of there and get back to playing real football.

 

[Willie55]

Why isn't someone asking why Polian is allowed to preside over the Competition Committee where he can cherrypick which rules deserve to be emphasized and design new rules to aid his club, the Colts? Isn't it like having the fox guard the chicken coop?

Perhaps the NFL should consider term limits -- and have Polian "promoted" to emeritus status.

The competition committee should be run out of the commissioner's office and be filled with people who have no affiliation with any specific team.

 

[DEVIOUS 1]

Wow, very sobering interview. VERY surprised at Mike's candor.

It's such a conflict of interest, I can't believe the NFL allows it.

Could you all imagine the outcry if Belichick was a member of the committee suggesting rule changes?

 

[vyrago]

Wow, very sobering interview. VERY surprised at Mike's candor.

It's such a conflict of interest, I can't believe the NFL allows it.

Could you all imagine the outcry if Belichick was a member of the committee suggesting rule changes?

He was done after the superbowl so he had nothing to lose. It would have been candor had he said this stuff while he was the head of officiating.

 

[PatsSox363804]

How many of you were absolutely SHOCKED when there were no PI calls on the Saints in the Superbowl? I know I was. I was waiting for it all game. I couldn't believe they didn't throw a flag on Vilma on the 3rd down before the missed FG, for example. Not that I thought it was a penalty, but that's never stopped the refs from throwing a Colts flag before. So they get no calls and have their worst loss of the season. Coincidence? I don't think so, especially when you consider how many of their games where they got that late flag for the momentum swing.

 

[Sicilian]

On the competition committee, I agree that it is a terrible conflict of interest to have a team employee making decisions on rule changes. It should be a neutral NFL run organization, and term limits are a good idea too (to keep ideas fresh... maybe ten years max?).

As for the PI debate, I keep going back and forth on this. A bogus PI call that results in 40+ yards is insane, but I can't think of a real good way to fix it. It's already a judgment call for the most part, do we really want to add another layer of judgment to decide whether it was flagrant or not? If a set of criteria that was pretty clear cut could be drawn up that would be one thing, but I'm can't think of any that aren't fairly open ended as well.

I think the point of emphasis just needs to be rethought. I think all refs should be shown a tape of this past Super Bowl. I saw a lot of contact that in regular season games might have been called, but they let the players play... and I certainly don't remember the offenses having trouble passing the ball.

 

[Prufrock]

So basically they have taken the old facemasking rules and pretty much applied them to pass interference?

 

[upstater1]

I have no idea why people are locked into changing the PI rule to what college football has.

Why not a spot foul if under 25 yards, a 25 yard penalty if over 25 yards, and a spot foul if its totally egregious (i.e. grabbing a guy with your hands or pushing him hard).

I was amazed when Pereira revealed that a different emphasis on a rule makes a huge difference. He said that the emphasis on holding penalties on receivers was changed so that the refs were disallowed from considering advantage or disadvantage, which is totally against the fundamental way that referees are taught to do their job.

 

[Funktopus]

my 2cents on this.

1) I hope that history remembers this point of emphasis effect the same way that MLB hitters are remembered before and after they lowered the mound or how NBA scorers are remembered before and after the implementation of the shot clock or 3 point shot.

2) It doesn't make the game better played. If I were a WR i'd add practicing drawing PI as part of my daily routine. And maybe neglect practicing something else more football related.

3) It doesn't make the game better to watch. For those of us who watch soccer, we can expect to see World Cup action this summer complete with Italian and Argentine flopping and pleading with referees for a foul that may or may not come, but either way will be looked back on as the game changing moment. Not to mention the agonized, pained looks on soccer players' faces while they're trying to draw a foul as if they just watched a puppy clubbed to death with another puppy. Thank god they wear helmets in the NFL just so we don't have to see their faces as WRs scan the field for their rightful and just yellow flag.

 

[Kontradiction]

Re: Pereira on Polian and point of emphasis.

And, in all honesty, it's fairly easy to tell what's flagrant and what isn't.

It's fairly easy for the fan watching at home to tell what's flagrant and what isn't. For referees, who are watching the game in game speed from the sideline, it's not so easy. The only way to get the "flagrant" issue 100% correct everytime is if PI were to become challengeable. That won't happen simply for the reason that if PI was made challengeable, then where would the league draw the line on penalties? Almost every penalty out there would eventually have to be made challengeable.

 

[emoney_33]

Why are people arguing a 15 yard / spot foul for flagrant fouls wouldn't work? The refs are ALREADY using judgement on every single flag they throw. They already judge whether it was incidental contact or interference, whether the DB was playing the ball or impeding the receiver etc...

The fans are going to complain about calls no matter what, favoritism and bias will always be more prevalent than objectivity among sports fans, and RIGHTFULLY so. A flagrant foul would work just fine, and is much better than the stupid always-spot-foul crap we have now. And flagrant should always be reviewable without needing to waste a challenge / risk a timeout.