OT - NFL officiating

[gopkrs]

It has been bugging me for awhile. It just seems like the officiating gets a little worse every year. I just watched the roughing the passer call on SF against Breeze. The guy did it like he was supposed to. Could not do anything else except not touch him. But roughing calls, head to head when really the RB/receiver creates the contact. Pass interference calls. I know it is not an easy job but man...Maybe the booth should be allowed to overturn some of the blatant ones? Maybe the refs should admit mistakes more and retract? What really bothers me is when a ref throws a flag and then other refs throw their flags just to back the first one up. I just think the quality is not what it should be.

 

[El Guapo]

You know what bugs me is the actual act of flag throwing. When the ref hit Orlando Brown in the eye a decade ago or so, they changed it to where refs were supposed to throw it up in the air. Now I see them all throwing the flags at the players again. That eye injury, while remote in nature, effectively ended his career. I don't know why refs can't just throw the flag up in the air.

As for inconsistencies, I really blame the league for all of it. They are putting the refs in a spot to make really hard calls. Al Riveron is still an NFL employee, and is essentially told how to conduct business. The league needs to decide to let the refs admit mistakes (such as the Fail Mary) after the fact. We all make mistakes. Not admitting to mistakes makes you twice the fool.

 

[Mondio]

rule changes, expectations and replay have all affected it and not in a good way IMO. I'm good with refs on the field making a call and evaluate them and keep the good ones. it will get bad, then it will get better as guys learn to trust their eyes again and quit changing rules.

 

[Dantés]

I don't think the officials themselves get worse every year, but rather the rule book becomes bigger, more nuanced, and more full of judgment calls every year.

People think that every unfortunate occurrence in a big moment must be legislated out of the game somehow. And usually, the attempt to do so just makes for a messier sport while not actually providing a solution.

I say this as a millennial myself-- young fans need to realize that life isn't perfectly fair, and neither are sports, and they can just get over it.

If the league really wanted to fix this problem, the solution to me is to cut the rule book down dramatically and get rid of all replay review. Give the refs less to worry about, let them focus on the rules that remain, try to keep judgment calls out as much as possible, and play the freaking game.

People say "so you want ref mistakes to stand and influence the outcomes of the games?" To which I reply that they still do. No matter how many rules they make, how much review they allow for, etc. refs still blow decisions that alter games. The rules and replay just drag the whole thing out and make the product less watchable.

I feel like the NFL in 10 years will be:

-One play takes place

*10 minute stoppage to review each aspect of the play on replay*

*Assessment of any and all penalties that were discovered in slow motion*

-Second play takes place

And so on...

 

[Mondio]

i'm partial to the Keep It Simple Stupid approach myself.

 

[Mavster]

The main issue to me is how penalties are enforced. Automatic 1st downs when the penalty didn't occur beyond the 1st down marker is plain stupid.

Every 3rd down the defense faces I'm just praying GB doesn't get called for a penalty.

 

[jon]

I have always hated video review, and I do mean always. Refs make mistakes, no denying it, but they rarely have game-changer consequences and they even out.

Just play the call and get on with the game.

There's been a real 'mission creep' on replay as we see more calls come under review as years go by, and we see more refs & coaches relying on it.

For example, it is common now, even preferred, to let a play run when the ball hits the ground. If it's not a fumble, the reasoning goes, they can call it back. I think this is lazy officiating, and lazy officiating leads to worse officiating overall. If the ref sees a fumble, call it. If not, blow the whistle for the tackle. To call nothing and leave it to NY and a video review is a lame, bureaucratic option that weakens officiating. Make a call, spot the ball, and get on with the game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I would prefer the NFL to actually employ their officials. In my opinion that would make officiating better over the long haul.

 

[El Guapo]

Do you think they are distracted because they have day jobs?

 

[gopkrs]

I have watched that Breeze sack several times now. And I am no longer so certain that the defender did not land full on him. Thing is, Breeze was pushed into the sacker a bit by other blockers just before he went to the ground. So did that affect how they landed? And then I am no longer so certain that the defender did not land full on him. Anyone have an opinion on that play/call?

 

[swhitset]

I have watched that Breeze sack several times now. And I am no longer so certain that the defender did not land full on him. Thing is, Breeze was pushed into the sacker a bit by other blockers just before he went to the ground. So did that affect how they landed? And then I am no longer so certain that the defender did not land full on him. Anyone have an opinion on that play/call?

My opinion is that it sucks for Breeze, but it’s football.

 

[Dantés]

My opinion is that it sucks for Breeze, but it’s football.

Exactly-- there should not be players on the field who are exempt from being tackled when they have the ball.

 

[El Guapo]

Exactly-- there should not be players on the field who are exempt from being tackled when they have the ball.

Rah Rah, I agree with you in principle, but agree with the NFL's general approach. 99% of Packers fans thought that the hit by Anthony Barr on Rodgers was unnecessary. The NFL wants it's best players (QBs) on the field, so it makes sense to provide some extra protections for them. In a vacuum, I love just going out there and playing the game. However in the world of professional football with multi million dollar mini-economies involved, it makes sense to protect QBs.

 

[Dantés]

Rah Rah, I agree with you in principle, but agree with the NFL's general approach. 99% of Packers fans thought that the hit by Anthony Barr on Rodgers was unnecessary. The NFL wants it's best players (QBs) on the field, so it makes sense to provide some extra protections for them. In a vacuum, I love just going out there and playing the game. However in the world of professional football with multi million dollar mini-economies involved, it makes sense to protect QBs.

I don't think that Barr's hit was a good example of what we're talking about. That was a late hit. Rodgers throws the ball, takes another step, and Barr then lowers his head and drives. It wasn't "bang, bang." He was not in mid-tackle when the ball came out. It was just late. That should be a penalty.

The Brees injury is different. He just got sacked, and that got flagged.It's insane to me that the NFL has made it illegal for defenders to hit high, hit low, or to land on QB's. Defenders are asked to fight like crazy to get past blockers, and then hit a QB between the head and waist and make sure not to land on them. That's a bunch of ********.

QB's should be treated like any other ball carrier while they have the ball, and if they don't like it they can retire.

 

[gopkrs]

There is no reason a corn fed DT should be allowed to fall with his full weight on the QB. I agree with that rule 100%.

 

[Dantés]

There is no reason a corn fed DT should be allowed to fall with his full weight on the QB. I agree with that rule 100%.

Should he be allowed to fall on a RB or a WR? Or should we just make it illegal in general for defenders to fall on the player they're tackling, incidental or not?

 

[gopkrs]

The way it is right now, it is only the QB. The QB is different because he is a lot of times throwing and is completely vulnerable and also the owners recognize how important the position is to the team and how expensive. As to other positions. I remember a Packer game two years ago when immediately after the play a huge D lineman fell purposely on Aaron Jones. It was totally willful and was not helpful to the defense in any way except that Jones came out of the game and did not go back in. It hurt him. I could not believe there was no penalty. So yes, sometimes there is unnecessary roughness on other positions but they have singled out the QBs and it's a good thing. Some of the hits to the helmut are ridiculous though.

 

[Dantés]

The way it is right now, it is only the QB. The QB is different because he is a lot of times throwing and is completely vulnerable and also the owners recognize how important the position is to the team and how expensive. As to other positions. I remember a Packer game two years ago when immediately after the play a huge D lineman fell purposely on Aaron Jones. It was totally willful and was not helpful to the defense in any way except that Jones came out of the game and did not go back in. It hurt him. I could not believe there was no penalty. So yes, sometimes there is unnecessary roughness on other positions but they have singled out the QBs and it's a good thing. Some of the hits to the helmut are ridiculous though.

It’s a terrible thing. It makes a defender’s job that much harder in a game that’s ridiculously slanted in favor of the offense. It assesses a penalty based on a judgment call of a player’s motivations. If a QB has the ball, they should be eligible to be legally tackled. If that tackle ends with the defender on top of the player, so be it. There’s already a penalty for late hits.

 

[Dantés]

I actually can't believe that Packer fans would defend that horrible rule. We had first row seats to it changing games a couple years ago. Clay Matthews was getting flagged all over the place for perfectly normal tackles simply because he ended up on top of the QB at the end of the play, which is obviously a pretty common, reasonable outcome of when tackling another person.

That trashbag rule literally cost the Packers a win, unequivocally, against the Vikings. I guess the league's opinion was that Clay was supposed to press the pause button on reality halfway through the tackle, remove himself from the equation, and let Cousins fall the rest of the way by himself. Totally reasonable.

The NFL knows it's horrible too. They haven't been nearly as aggressive calling it since that first year when Clay kept getting screwed. Because they knew it was ********. But they had already put it in place. So as the league often does when they create stupid rules, they told the refs to call it less via back channels.

 

[gopkrs]

It has already been proven that those big linemen don't have to land full body weight on the QB. It is probably down like 95% from what it used to be. They should not be allowed to land on them like that. And now they are not allowed. They should not be allowed to hit players when they are out of bounds. And that too is way down from what it used to be. Because the players don't need to do it. Willie Wood died with brain problems. How many others. It has been proven that trauma can happen to some people when they get repeatedly bashed on the head. PROVEN. So they are trying to and have slowed that down also. No more Chuck Cecil knocking himself out while crunching a receiver. They can still hit very hard. But they need to do it w/o hitting helmet to helmet. Seems to me the game is still exciting. These are good things. Not all the changes are good. But I don't know how a reasonable person can argue with these.

 

[El Guapo]

As a moderately talented weekend warrior, I absolutely had the body control to not crush and hurt people. These elite athletes absolutely do as well. I was at the game when Clay was flagged multiple times, and that sucked, but in the broader scope the league was trying to send a message that changed behaviors quickly. It worked, despite being a terrible way for us to end the game against Minnesota.

You are right that Barr had an extra step. The comparison that I was drawing was about defensive players driving their weight into the QB. It's not necessary. I have to balance my thirst for violence by others in sport, with the realization that these are people that have to live with the physical consequences of game play for the rest of their lives.

 

[Dantés]

It has already been proven that those big linemen don't have to land full body weight on the QB. It is probably down like 95% from what it used to be. They should not be allowed to land on them like that. And now they are not allowed. They should not be allowed to hit players when they are out of bounds. And that too is way down from what it used to be. Because the players don't need to do it. Willie Wood died with brain problems. How many others. It has been proven that trauma can happen to some people when they get repeatedly bashed on the head. PROVEN. So they are trying to and have slowed that down also. No more Chuck Cecil knocking himself out while crunching a receiver. They can still hit very hard. But they need to do it w/o hitting helmet to helmet. Seems to me the game is still exciting. These are good things. Not all the changes are good. But I don't know how a reasonable person can argue with these.

You’re conflating a whole bunch of things here. I’m not advocating for hitting people out of bounds or helmet to helmet.

But there are plenty of cases where a defender lands on the QB incidentally. That should not be a flag.

It’s football. People tackle each other. Sometimes they land on one another. We are all ok with this as it’s allowed with any other ball carrier and no one decries it. It’s silly how many rules have gone into place specifically just to protect QB’s.

 

[Dantés]

As a moderately talented weekend warrior, I absolutely had the body control to not crush and hurt people. These elite athletes absolutely do as well. I was at the game when Clay was flagged multiple times, and that sucked, but in the broader scope the league was trying to send a message that changed behaviors quickly. It worked, despite being a terrible way for us to end the game against Minnesota.

You are right that Barr had an extra step. The comparison that I was drawing was about defensive players driving their weight into the QB. It's not necessary. I have to balance my thirst for violence by others in sport, with the realization that these are people that have to live with the physical consequences of game play for the rest of their lives.

The problem is that the rule assumes that all such tackles are intentional and not incidental. I don’t at all buy the argument that defenders can always easily avoid this, especially when playing fast and attacking the QB head on.

Like Street’s hit on Brees. There is no case that he was attempting anything extracurricular. To make that case is pure speculation. He didn’t even land directly on top of him. He rushed, he got an angle, he took Brees down in a textbook fashion.

And yet it’s a 15 yard penalty... for tackling.

This is my issue. It’s not because I thirst for more violence in the sport. It’s that they’re systematically making it harder for certain players to do their jobs just to protect this one marquee position. And on top of that, this is another rule that’s a judgment call. So players like Street, who didn’t actually land completely on top of the QB, get flagged anyways because the rule exists.

 

[Dantés]

Here’s a question— should pancake blocks by offensive linemen of defenders be a penalty against the offense?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Do you think they are distracted because they have day jobs?

I don't think that officials are distracted by their day time jobs but having them work all week on improving their officiating would result in a better product on Sunday in my opinion.