Mike Pereira on NFL officiating clinic 2014.

[Jackson 2]

I've asked that question many times. The day I believe that the league itself is favoring certain teams will be my very last as a fan or follower of that league.

It baffles me why people who believe that are still fans.

I am not typically a conspiracy theorist, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Bill Polian's insistence on "reinforcement" of the rules regarding defensive PI/defensive holding was a result of the Patriots treatment of the Colt's receivers in 2003. I believe that the NFL tightened up that aspect of officiating because of Polian's influence and that Peyton Manning was the biggest beneficiary of those "adjustments" and still is to this day. With that said, I agree that the officials still "let them play", so to speak, during the playoffs. The relaxation of the rules regarding those types of calls was especially vivid during last year's playoffs, by my observation.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

The 2 times Manning has been embarrassed in big games by a defense the league has come running to try and help him out.

Just to add to the cynicism, funny they do this after the Patriots assemble an all world secondary.

Was coming in here to point out that the last time they wanted to do this 'emphasis' was when Manning was thoroughly embarrassed in the playoffs (he gets embarrassed in the playoffs on a regular basis anyhow that's why I used thoroughly to differentiate). But I am going to take the optimistic route and I believe that IF, and that's a big IF, the referees are at least consistent with their rulings we should still be okay compared to teams with lesser talented secondaries. It should still pay having a great secondary since if we are hurt by the new rules, other teams should be hurt even more IMO and we do have an elite QB so if anyone benefits we should be among them as well.

Now if this becomes like the Polian rules where certain teams WR's can't be breathed upon while Reche Caldwell can get tackled in the end zone with no flag, then this 'emphasis' is a problem.

 

[RayClay]

Yeah. I agree.
I'm not sure why anyone who believes the league is trying to help Manning and/or hurt the Patriots would bother to continue to watch any games.

Not that I agree with direction they are trying to go with these point of emphasis calls, but I'd just stop watching if I thought this was league designed to help a certain team/player and hurt the Patriots or any other team.

Well, Shula owned the competition committee for years before Polian did the same in an attempt to boost his all passing team.

The fact that it doesn't work is beside the point. People use politics to advance their goals. The omissioner is inept at it compared to those two and so is the team he used to work for, but you're incredibly naive to think such politicking doesn't exist there as it does in the rest of our lives.

It's ridiculous on the face of it to have power brokers on a "competition committee" who are coaches and general managers of teams in "competition."

If the ommissioner wasn't such an inept boob, he might end up owning, or controlling 2-3 teams in his league like the corrupt Bud Selig did at one time, making trades benefiting the Yanks and Red Sox as if he was playing a dummy hand in bridge.

 

[SB39]

I am not typically a conspiracy theorist, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Bill Polian's insistence on "reinforcement" of the rules regarding defensive PI/defensive holding was a result of the Patriots treatment of the Colt's receivers in 2003. I believe that the NFL tightened up that aspect of officiating because of Polian's influence and that Peyton Manning was the biggest beneficiary of those "adjustments" and still is to this day. With that said, I agree that the officials still "let them play", so to speak, during the playoffs. The relaxation of the rules regarding those types of calls was especially vivid during last year's playoffs, by my observation.

Oh I agree there are individual biases on the competition/rules committees. I just think that the notion that the officials or the league itself are biased in favor of certain teams is laughable, and I question why anyone who believes in those biases is a fan. There is nothing more important to sports than the belief in competitive fairness. I know I sure wouldn't follow any sports league that gave preferential treatment to my rivals.

 

[Zeus]

You guys missed the big one:

Mike Pereira @MikePereira · 5h
Honestly, I don't remember there being so many points of emphasis. Also, false starts, taunting, and others. I cover more later.

There are too many emphasises expect none to be enforced well. The key word is "well." Expect capricious calls.

More flags, less football. The game was better when they let the players play.

 

[Danger Zone]

I was wondering where all the outrage and Bill Polian 2004 references were when reading about this same point of emphasis in another thread.

I see they're all collected here.

It wouldnt surprise me in the slightest to see the League make the decision that it would rather
see high scoring offenses do well because scoring points "better" is for the league than physical, point-suppressing defenses that are less "exciting" to watch for some fans.

You dont have to believe in conspiracies or even suspect the League is "cheating" to believe that yes, they are intentionally trying to shape the NFL by encouraging some styles of play and intentionally supressing others.

 

[Jackson 2]

Oh I agree there are individual biases on the competition/rules committees. I just think that the notion that the officials or the league itself are biased in favor of certain teams is laughable, and I question why anyone who believes in those biases is a fan. There is nothing more important to sports than the belief in competitive fairness. I know I sure wouldn't follow any sports league that gave preferential treatment to my rivals.

I would contribute to a league which gave preferential treatment to my team.

 

[SB39]

I would contribute to a league which gave preferential treatment to my team.

You're probably not alone in that opinion, but I certainly don't share it. I would not feel the same satisfaction in my team winning a championship as I would if "the fix was in."

 

[Jackson 2]

You're probably not alone in that opinion, but I certainly don't share it. I would not feel the same satisfaction in my team winning a championship as I would if "the fix was in."

Hint: joking (sort of)...

 

[lamafist]

Unlike in 2004, there isn't anyone on the competition committee with clear pro-Manning interests, nor has there been any suggestion that any other owner or executive has been trying to throw his weight around.

My take:

It was widely observed last season that strict enforcement from the 2004 rules emphasis had gradually eroded, and that defenses were pretty much back to the pre-2004 chippy, physical style of coverage.

Meanwhile, it was also widely observed last season that offenses had responded to this by increasingly integrating "rub" and "pick" plays to use the defense's smothering coverage play against them. I suspect this is the kind of "offensive pass interference" the NFL was telling Mike Pereira was being emphasized to balance out the defensive holding emphasis.

So it appears to me that this is mostly about nipping in the bud a burgeoning style of play in which there is so much borderline contact being perpetrated by receiver and defender alike that fans will have reason to complain about an un-thrown flag on every play (more than they do already.)

 

[lamafist]

As far as how this affects us, it's great timing, considering that the Pats just acquired the one guy in the league who can still play shutdown corner in spite of the holding and illegal contact emphasis.

 

[SB39]

As far as how this affects us, it's great timing, considering that the Pats just acquired the one guy in the league who can still play shutdown corner in spite of the holding and illegal contact emphasis.

That's how I feel. The best secondaries in the league will still be the best secondaries in the league so long as the rules are enforced equally.

 

[PatsBoy12]

Whether you're a person who believes in conspiracy theories or not, one can't help but notice how rules change every time Manning is embarrassed in the playoffs. It's happened too many times to be merely coincidence. Nonetheless, I could care less as long as it isn't one of those calls that decides or has a huge impact on the outcome of the game (Hobbs P.I.). Let the players decide the game.

 

[PatsBoy12]

As far as how this affects us, it's great timing, considering that the Pats just acquired the one guy in the league who can still play shutdown corner in spite of the holding and illegal contact emphasis.

No disrespect, but Revis gets away with tons of holding and grabbing just like any other good CB. They're crafty and know how to get away with it more often than they get caught. Go back and watch some Welker/Revis film. The guy had Welker's jersey on almost every play. LOL People like Revis get the benefit of the no-call because of reputation.

 

[dales804]

No disrespect, but Revis gets away with tons of holding and grabbing just like any other good CB. They're crafty and know how to get away with it more often than they get caught. Go back and watch some Welker/Revis film. The guy had Welker's jersey on almost every play. LOL People like Revis get the benefit of the no-call because of reputation.

It's funny. I recall watching Revis play against the Patriots and always being amazed at how he could cover for so long. I don't remember thinking a single time about how he was holding or interfering with a WR. There was one pay in particular where Brady had a ton of time to throw and eventually got rid of the ball to Moss I think. I remember thinking, "there's no way he is still covered because it's been like 6 seconds." Revis was right on his hip and swatted the ball away. Every Jets game I just assumed whoever Revis was covering was going to be taken out and that's usually how it went. The guy is simply amazing and will be fine regardless of what rules there are.

 

[goheels22002]

I like the illegal contact point of emphasis from the standpoint of the Patriots' receivers. Gronkowski gets mauled or held, especially in the Red Zone. And, these other guys need all the help they can get to run their routes. Let's not get too optimistic about the Patriots WR corps. They're okay, not great.
The Pats wound up 18th in receiving last season which is below average. That was not an indication of the quality of the guy throwing the ball.

 

[PatsBoy12]

It's funny. I recall watching Revis play against the Patriots and always being amazed at how he could cover for so long. I don't remember thinking a single time about how he was holding or interfering with a WR. There was one pay in particular where Brady had a ton of time to throw and eventually got rid of the ball to Moss I think. I remember thinking, "there's no way he is still covered because it's been like 6 seconds." Revis was right on his hip and swatted the ball away. Every Jets game I just assumed whoever Revis was covering was going to be taken out and that's usually how it went. The guy is simply amazing and will be fine regardless of what rules there are.

Don't really know if you're agreeing or disagreeing and again, I mean no disrespect, but go back and watch again. I remember one game in particular where it was literally EVERY highlight they showed where Revis had a chunk of Welker's jersey (four clips total). I'm not saying that's all he does, nor do I know how this point of emphasis will affect him, if at all. I'm just saying that EVERY corner in the league grabs and holds on most plays. Some get called, some get missed. The better players, in just about every sport, get the benefit of the no-call and players of a lesser name usually don't get the same benefit of the no-call.

Revis will likely be allowed to play the game the way he's always played it because his reputation precedes him. Even after the off year he had with Tampa, most people still think he is the best CB in football, even after the season that Sherman had. A few people still believe he will re-emerge as the best defensive player in all of football. Regardless of how the game is called by the refs this season, I'm happy he's prowling the NE secondary and not the opponent.

 

[RayClay]

I was wondering where all the outrage and Bill Polian 2004 references were when reading about this same point of emphasis in another thread.

I see they're all collected here.

It wouldnt surprise me in the slightest to see the League make the decision that it would rather
see high scoring offenses do well because scoring points "better" is for the league than physical, point-suppressing defenses that are less "exciting" to watch for some fans.

You dont have to believe in conspiracies or even suspect the League is "cheating" to believe that yes, they are intentionally trying to shape the NFL by encouraging some styles of play and intentionally supressing others.

Agreed. Nevertheless, there is the competition committee where certain coaches and general managers influence the rules through their political power. It is wrong.

 

[strngplyr]

These rules only apply to the regular season. Defensive teams are always allowed to play in the post season. BB knows this. Everything he does has a very distinct reason behind it.

Offenses will dominate the regular seasons all year long, but when it counts the teams that show up are the balanced ones because they let them play football how it should be played.

 

[SB39]

Whether you're a person who believes in conspiracy theories or not, one can't help but notice how rules change every time Manning is embarrassed in the playoffs. It's happened too many times to be merely coincidence.

The rules have been changed twice following Peyton Manning embarrassments (actually it is not a rules change but an emphasis on currently existing rules). Peyton Manning has embarrassed himself in the playoffs about a dozen times. So no, I don't see that as "too many time to be a coincidence."

If anything, these new rules emphasis will hurt the Broncos more than help them. People are completely ignoring that they are also adding offensive interference as a point of emphasis. I think that is a direct response to the type of offense the Broncos play which will hurt them more than other teams because of how often they run WR pick plays. In fact, it may very well be 100% a direct response to the infamous Wes Welker hit on Talib.