Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

So, the instant replay mess could be fixed rather easily if the league wanted to do so. Also, anything should be challenged. I dislike how certain things cannot be challenged like pass interference and other things.

Reaser wrote:What's great is when a QB gets sacked and there's a penalty for roughing the passer, that helps decide the outcome of the game. For example Palmer getting sacked by the 49ers on Sunday.

You know the Goodell/owner/competition committee apologists were happy about that, they don't want anyone to get tackled playing football, someone might get hurt.

I used to watch a lot of English Premier League soccer, but after awhile I realized that there were really only 2-3 good teams, 2-3 bad teams, and about 20 teams that were average. Unless a "good" team played a "bad" team, the outcome of the game would be decided by a referee decision. A player would flop in the penalty box, and if the ref ignored it the game would end 0-0. If the ref awarded a penalty, the game would end 1-0. The entirety of the 90 minutes of action was meaningless...the game always came down to the ref awarding penalty.

I think the NFL has unfortunately become just like the EPL. There are too many teams, the talent is so diluted that the vast majority of the teams have equal talent, it doesn't really require any skill to score points in the NFL, etc. Most NFL games I've seen this year involve the teams mechanically trading TDs, and then towards the end of the game something screwy will happen when the ref inserts himself into the action and the outcome of the game is decided. Its not a very rewarding experience.

JWL wrote:So, the instant replay mess could be fixed rather easily if the league wanted to do so. Also, anything should be challenged. I dislike how certain things cannot be challenged like pass interference and other things.

I don't think the league really cares. They're obviously reactive in nearly every instance, and would only react if people stopped watching.

I agree about anything being able to be challenged - it's worked well in the CFL, including the the Grey Cup which had a very meaningful P.I. call on a challenge.

Goes back to the competition committee and people like Jeff Fisher (love his asinine "make the game longer" response that the media never follows up on when he's asked about making all plays reviewable) ...

Bryan wrote: I think the NFL has unfortunately become just like the EPL. There are too many teams, the talent is so diluted that the vast majority of the teams have equal talent, it doesn't really require any skill to score points in the NFL, etc. Most NFL games I've seen this year involve the teams mechanically trading TDs, and then towards the end of the game something screwy will happen when the ref inserts himself into the action and the outcome of the game is decided. Its not a very rewarding experience.

Some great points here. I'd argue that free agency has more to do with the generic product than the number of teams or the "talent" on them, though. Other than the occasional genetic freak who came out of the chute superior to most mortals, "talent" is a misnomer, describing something that is more accurately developed by coaches and honed over time.

In other words, great teams of the past were comprised of people who played together in the same position and in the same units over several years. They didn't necessarily have to be great individually, but they became great collectively. Thinking this is what the great George Allen meant when he said "talent is a burden" (open to other interpretations, though ).

Free agency made the one-team-career an exception rather than the rule, and team quality has suffered ever since.

JWL wrote:So, the instant replay mess could be fixed rather easily if the league wanted to do so. Also, anything should be challenged. I dislike how certain things cannot be challenged like pass interference and other things.

The trouble with that is that, strictly speaking, I think there's interference (often on both sides) on 90% of all passing plays. Officials ignore a lot of minor stuff (except when they don't, as with the bogus interference all on Gronkowski Sunday), but on replay they'd almost be forced to call it.

JWL wrote:Okay, I get what you mean now. Yes, Carey was wrong in the sense that what he thought should have been called was not called. But was Carey really right in terms of what the ruling should have been?

Evidently not. Dean Blandino just said it was an interception on "Official Review", not that I put any more faith in him than I do Carey but going off what each said, with respect to how it was ruled, Blandino's explanation was much more logical.

JohnH19 wrote:

MIKEBENNIDICT wrote:

JohnH19 wrote:What the powers that be don't seem to realize in their silly attempts to increase offense and player safety is that the more rules they add, the more rules there are to break. This leads to more penalty calls, many of which are debatable or downright silly. I am so sick of illegal contact and hands to the face penalties...

Now why would you have a problem with hands to the face?

Wanna a player to lose his helmet during a play?

How many times did you ever see that called before this year?

I've seen cases where football helmets come off and nothing's done about it.

bachslunch wrote:

luckyshow wrote:Imagine if players were still allowed to link arms in front of a kick returner as he headed downfield, or there was no rule about poking fingers into the eyes of those across the line. Well, every one of those rule changes brought about similar critiques....

Moe Howard would never be able to play the game in this day and age.....

It that necessary?

Reaser wrote:

JWL wrote:Okay, I get what you mean now. Yes, Carey was wrong in the sense that what he thought should have been called was not called. But was Carey really right in terms of what the ruling should have been?

Evidently not. Dean Blandino just said it was an interception on "Official Review", not that I put any more faith in him than I do Carey but going off what each said, with respect to how it was ruled, Blandino's explanation was much more logical.

I saw that too but wasn't paying much attention to what Blandino said. I just focused on the play again and tried to apply common sense. Turns out looking at the play two days later helped me. The officials got it right on Sunday based on common sense because Chancellor had clear possession as his elbow hit the ground. What happened after that is irrelevant based on common sense. Based on whatever the NFL rule is, I don't know if it was called right or not. The NFL probably doesn't even know.

An easier call to make was the Antonio Cromartie interception and that one was botched somehow.

MIKEBENNIDICT wrote:

bachslunch wrote:

luckyshow wrote:Imagine if players were still allowed to link arms in front of a kick returner as he headed downfield, or there was no rule about poking fingers into the eyes of those across the line. Well, every one of those rule changes brought about similar critiques....

Moe Howard would never be able to play the game in this day and age.....

It that necessary?

Soitanly!