Brian Burke, ESPN Analytics: "Reduce penalties... by increasing the penalty yardage"

[oldrover]

How to solve rising penalty rates in the NFL: Increase the yardage

I've quoted the changes below so you need not click on ESPN...



I understand the motive... reducing penalties... but honestly, a good chunk of the penalties called are ticky-tack, if not completely wrong. Refs especially mess up roughing the passer and pass interference these days, and those are big impact plays. And honestly, teams probably technically commit some kind of a penalty on every play. Can't say that more penalty yardage feels like the right answer.

So, what to do? Anything? I'd personally prefer to see the NFL only throw the flag on plays that even that team's own fans will say, "yeah... that's a foul." Instead... it's flag after flag after flag... dunno how you all feel... but I feel like yelling at the TV...

 

[luuked]

I see people still keep fighting symptoms instead of the underlying issue which in this case is the complexity of the rulebook and the many grey areas that become judgement calls.

 

[PrairiePat]

Holding can be called on every play. So can DPI (and frankly, OPI as well these days). Many times it seems the timing of when these are called is just the whim of the referee. I'm not sure increasing the punishment is the answer. Random penalties already seem to have too much influence on the outcomes of games.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

This will ruin drives and dramatically reduce scoring

.

 

[Sicilian]

This sounds like one of those things that a nerd (and I can say that, because I am one) comes up with while sitting at a cubicle in a temperature controlled office, sipping watered down Keurig coffee and "theorizing" on what would happen if football were just chess with meatsacks instead of pieces.

 

[Family]

Does it reduce long pass interference penalties?

 

[The Boston Patriot]

Brilliant!

 

[oldrover]

I see people still keep fighting symptoms instead of the underlying issue which in this case is the complexity of the rulebook and the many grey areas that become judgement calls.

Amen, brother! I'm a big fan of a general governing philosophy in life (can apply to business, sports, personal, you name it) which can be summed up succinctly:

"A few rules... strictly enforced."

 

[Sicilian]

Amen, brother! I'm a big fan of a general governing philosophy in life (can apply to business, sports, personal, you name it) which can be summed up succinctly:

"A few rules... strictly enforced."

Bill Burr used to do a bit about laws, where he said (paraphrasing), that there should only be about 10 laws in America. If you want to make a new one, you have to remove one of the old ones. That makes you really think about whether the new law is worth it. Hyperbole of course, but as a philosophy pretty sound. If you have unlimited power to enact anything you want, there's very little incentive to think it through beforehand. So you end up with the Frankenstein's Monster that is the NFL rulebook.

 

[203Pat]

It may not be a popular opinion but I would do away with instant replay. Bad calls happen, they are part of sports and trying to eliminate all mistakes just seems to be making things worse. If I were in charge I would tell the referees to "let them play". Flag the blatant and egregious calls but let the ticky-tack crap go. In the end of the day hope it all evens out for both sides and the game is far less convoluted.

 

[luuked]

Amen, brother! I'm a big fan of a general governing philosophy in life (can apply to business, sports, personal, you name it) which can be summed up succinctly:

"A few rules... strictly enforced."

I agree and that is why I have less problems than many others with the insanely strict roughing the passer rules as long as they are being applied consistently. **** it stop the play as soon as the pass rusher gets 2 hands on a QB for all I care as long as it is called with as little variance as possible.

Nothing pisses me off more than seeing the same rule being applied completely differently between games and sometimes even within the same game.

Do away with as many judgement calls as possible even if it means stricter (or more relaxed) rules.

 

[maust]

"A few rules... strictly enforced."

Sounds suspiciously like the Redhead's Guide To Successful Husband Training

 

[PatriotsReign]

Ahhhhh.......

NO

 

[Bill Lee]

Seems to me to be the thing an egghead analytics guy would come up with.

We have a crisis with officiating, so the thing to do is make each penalty more costly?

That puts even more pressure to resolve the officiating crisis, adding gas to the fire.

Sounds like someone saying the way to solve teenage drinking issues is to hand out free heroin.

 

[maust]

Nothing pisses me off more than seeing the same rule being applied completely differently between games and sometimes even within the same game.

Do away with as many judgement calls as possible even if it means stricter (or more relaxed) rules.

I'd like to see an 'eye in the sky' official that not only has the ability to call penalties but also the ability to overrule any called on the field. It also wouldn't hurt my feelings any if we returned to the in order for DPI to be called a ball has to actually be catchable standard. Balls 2 yards out of bounds or 5 feet over the receivers head at the back of the end zone drawing a flag are an insult to the intelligence of all but Jete fans.

 

[Tony2046]

I see people still keep fighting symptoms instead of the underlying issue which in this case is the complexity of the rulebook and the many grey areas that become judgement calls.

I used to know what a catch was and now I used to know what PI was. If the NFL keeps fixing the rules I may soon used to know what an NFL game was.

 

[Bill Lee]

So, what to do? Anything? I'd personally prefer to see the NFL only throw the flag on plays that even that team's own fans will say, "yeah... that's a foul." Instead... it's flag after flag after flag... dunno how you all feel... but I feel like yelling at the TV...

The main reason the system is broken is that refs get graded each week so they feel they have to make ticky-tack calls or be dinged for not doing so.

I didn't understand this till a certain reporter spent a week with a ref and his report showed how paranoid the refs are about their grades.

I think it's fair to say they are obsessed with their grade, from what I read.

Their grade determines if they work playoffs or Super Bowl and these are big paydays for refs, not to mention prestige.

I have been in the camp that says any play should be reviewable, with the same two challenges per game.

If a coach wants to blow a challenge on an offensive line holding call, so be it, he'll blow his challenges quickly and we'll move on.

Just use the same "must be egregious, blatant to overturn" standard and use an off-field ref to sort it out like we now do.

Basically TV has learned all they need to do is go away to commercial till the call is reviewed, it's a windfall for them.

It sucks for the in-stadium experience, but I don't see a better way forward.

Some say it should be a "skygod" stopping play if something is questionable but I think that would negatively impact the flow of the game.

Let the refs on the field do their job and if they get it blatantly wrong let the challenge be the way to sort it out.

 

[slash83]

If defensive holding is 5 yards, why is offensive holding 10?

 

[Clonamery]

If defensive holding is 5 yards, why is offensive holding 10?

Because the OL are bigger. Next question.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I kinda like what someone said in a comment thread on this proposal elsewhere -- for every defensive penalty that gives an automatic first down to the offense, the analogous offensive penalty should create an immediate 4th down (or loss of possession if it is 4th down). So, for example, if the offense is called for holding on first down, it's now fourth down.