Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#943803 04/05/15 08:42 AM
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 108
F
Dawg Talker
OP Offline
Dawg Talker
F
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 108
Last month there was a lot of talk from the NFL regarding rule changes & one they mentioned was the PI penalty as a spot foul.

Why can't they have 2 "levels" of PI penalty, much like the "running into & roughing" the kicker.

Not sure how to define it yet, but something like a "flagrant" verses "incidental". Flagrant could be where the contact is either intentional or more physical, and the incidental is if the DB is running after the receiver and the ball is underthrown or maybe the DB males contact but nothing really severe.

My only down side to this would be I am not crazy about another very subjective penalty. I realize they all technically are, but it would open a can of worms I guess.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,341
W
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
W
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,341
I really think that the PI penalty should never exceed 15 yards, ever. That is the way that the NCAA handles it and it doesn't drastically affect the game. Let the refs choose between Holding (5 yards) or Interference (15 yards). These QBs just throwing it up for grabs and a receiver trying to come back for a ball they had no chance of catching 30 yards down the field is ridiculous, IMO.


#gmstrong.
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 108
F
Dawg Talker
OP Offline
Dawg Talker
F
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 108
That's kind of my point but I really feel it has to be more severe for intentional PI because if the DB knows he is giving up a TD he can just grab him. Even in BB on a breakaway you get 2 FTs & the ball.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,341
W
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
W
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,341
I just think that it should be a spot foul unless it exceeds 15 yards. If it is completely intentional, then they should the ability to call it a flagrant foul (like in basketball). The PI penalty always seemed to burn us and never helped. I don't know what the answer is, but I'd like to see changes, for sure.


#gmstrong.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
wow, hey FORT, I think that's a great idea. Obviously would need some definition on the differences but conceptually I like it.

Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Likes: 1
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Likes: 1
The first change I'm making is taking away the Automatic First Down on Defensive Holding/Illegal Contact..

You want 5 hards on it, sure..

But a team shouldn't get a first down on 3rd and 12 because the LB put his hand on a WR as he ran by him...

The worst I saw was when they called Haden for "pulling" on Julio Jones' jersey.. When you can clearly see it had no effect on Jones whatsoever..

I get that offense sells, chicks dig the long all, whatever..

But you're going to ruin the game if teams aren't allowed to play defense. Because now growing up, what kid is going to want to play Defense? Nah play offense man is so much more "fun" smirk


Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum PI rule change idea

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5