NFL considering changing DPI to 15 yard penalty

KontradictioN said:

Terrible idea.

Click to expand...

Why do think that Kontra?

1960Pats said:

If the db can make the tackle then maybe he's close enough to deserve just a 15 yard penalty.

One of the best interviews I've ever heard on this came from Mike Pereira on radio many years ago when they first started with the spot fouls.

Pereira was laying the blame (rightfully) on the competition committee. He was dead set against the spot foul calls. I'll see if I can find it. I think it was on 98.5 more than a decade ago.

Click to expand...

Unless Pereira was officiating prior to 1917, PI was already a spot foul. And, by the way, PI was made a spot foul in 1917 because, when it had just been a 10 yard penalty prior to that, DBs would just tackle would be receivers rather than give up the big play.

JarOfMayo51 said:

I think a better option would be to just make the existing pass interference a reviewable play by coaches with a challenge

Click to expand...

Once there's any physical contact at all, it becomes judgment as to whether the official deems the amount of contact sufficient to warrant the call. How does one review an opinion call of such a nature?

The only way to consider it would be to have the 15 yard and the penalty as is for flagrant fouls.

But these guys are so good they will skirt the gray area which will lead to more arguing.

The way it is doesn't affect the season much and the best teams still made the semi finals - usually they do.

So I say leave it alone. They could cut down on some of this by calling holding at the line a bit more = less downfield passes.

interesting stats:

Deus Irae said:

Once there's any physical contact at all, it becomes judgment as to whether the official deems the amount of contact sufficient to warrant the call. How does one review an opinion call of such a nature?

Click to expand...

It would have definitely come in handy during the 2006 AFCCG

JarOfMayo51 said:

It would have definitely come in handy during the 2006 AFCCG

Click to expand...

Why? That was a blown rules call, and the officials could have corrected that without a review.

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:

interesting stats:

Click to expand...

Thanks for that, it's the only real data we've had in this thread so far.

So the NFL is considering one of the biggest rule changes in years specifically and solely to target the Patriots and take away 7.5 yards a game from them. Got it.

TB_Helmet said:

Thanks for that, it's the only real data we've had in this thread so far.

So the NFL is considering one of the biggest rule changes in years specifically and solely to target the Patriots and take away 7.5 yards a game from them. Got it.

Click to expand...

It really targets all good offenses, with a few curious exceptions.

Drew Brees and the Saints get almost nothing in pass interference. I am not sure what to make of that. Ditto for KC. They have both become run-oriented, but still...

XLIX said:

That will never work. People would lose their bleeping minds arguing whether that 55 yard pass was regular DPI or "flagrant" DPI.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Any DPI is deliberate. I suppose a flat out tackle could be called flagrant. Short of that, good luck defining it. This is a bad idea.

maust1013 said:

The change I'd most like to see when it comes to PI is an embellishment penalty on the divas who put on high theatrics to draw a call. I'm okay with giving them an undeserved Emmy for the performance, it's the unearned yards that tick me off. Along with that it'd be great if they made it a 'point of emphasis' to enforce the existing rule that the ball has to be at least remotely catchable in order to call PI. We routinely see balls that fall 2 yards wide of being inbounds draw flags.

Click to expand...

Yes. Lets create even more grey area for refs to make judgement calls so we can have more controversy and inconsistency than less.

Good luck making refs judge what pass could have been caught without the contact in a world where QBs purposefully throw balls away around players they perceive to have been victims of PI to highlight the infraction. And please dont reply with examples of obvious cases because most of those would not be the issue but the 50% of non-obvious ones that can go either way. You dont want rules that creates many situations that can go either way but rather either very strict rules (and more penalties) or very relaxed rules (and more physicality) to have consistency. And Polian and the age of fantasy football have already legislated away the latter as a real option.

The Ravens will never win another game.

For what it's worth, I think this is an idea that's time has come. However, I would be shocked if it was implemented because it would immediately make NFL games lower scoring, which they would interpret to mean "less exciting."

The whole pass interference rule needs cleaned up. It's either no contact downfield allowed by either offense or defense or don't ever call it on either guy. I realize if they make this change it takes away the NFL's ability to shape games

Deus Irae said:

Once there's any physical contact at all, it becomes judgment as to whether the official deems the amount of contact sufficient to warrant the call. How does one review an opinion call of such a nature?

Click to expand...

By going over to the monitor and watching the replay.

XLIX said:

By going over to the monitor and watching the replay.

Click to expand...

Are you serious or really that dense ?

luuked said:

Are you serious or really that dense ?

Click to expand...

He asked a question and I answered it. Wtf is the problem?

Unlike you, I’m smart enough to realize that having a second (and third/fourth/etc) look at a play would improve a lot of calls because oftentimes pass interference is called by a ref running full speed trying to watch a bunch of other things at the same time.

How many times have we seen a penalty called which, after seeing the replay, we all see was an atrocious call? Why in the world would you think a referee couldn’t watch a replay and come to the same conclusion?

GoBlue said:

The whole pass interference rule needs cleaned up. It's either no contact downfield allowed by either offense or defense or don't ever call it on either guy.

Click to expand...

No, there's a big difference between incidental and deliberate contact to interfere, on either side -- that's why officials are trained to determine which is which. The rule is fine for the pro game, the refs just need to be better and more consistent. It's on them and not too much to ask.

Sounds good in theory but now any potential deep play you can just tackle the receiver and give up the 15 yards instead of a 30+ yard completion.

XLIX said:

He asked a question and I answered it. Wtf is the problem?

Unlike you, I’m smart enough to realize that having a second (and third/fourth/etc) look at a play would improve a lot of calls because oftentimes pass interference is called by a ref running full speed trying to watch a bunch of other things at the same time.

How many times have we seen a penalty called which, after seeing the replay, we all see was an atrocious call? Why in the world would you think a referee couldn’t watch a replay and come to the same conclusion?

Click to expand...

Because a replay will not solve any controversy in terms of pass interference. You show 100 people the PI Cooks got on AJ Bouye in the AFCCG before halftime and you will get several different opinions on it. Video replay will not help you with rules that are judgement calls because the core of the controversy is not the refs decision but the ambiguous rule that they are trying to enforce.

Video replay is great for decisions where there is not much wiggle room and the camera actually captures the important details (e.g. was a ball deflected before a PI call, did a ball cross the line) but generally wont help you decide whether there was enough physical contact to determine if a PI call was correct or not. Unless you change the rules to forbid any contact at all but then I dont think we need video evidence anyway..