|
Now that the season is upon us, I started thinking about
this game that we all love so much. It
is by far the best professional sport on Earth, but it’s not perfect. Here are my thoughts on what could make it
better.
Fix instant replay
This sounds like such a cliché. Everyone, from owners, to coaches, to
broadcasters, to journalists are always calling for an overhaul of instant
replay. Their complaints always seem to
be focused on the time it takes away from the game. While this may be true, I’d rather take the
time to get the proper call, though I’m just not sure why it takes a referee 10
times as long to see something that we see instantaneously. Obviously, he wants to get the call right, so
he needs to see it over and over again, to make the decision. This is my main problem with instant
replay. With the use of multiple
cameras providing multiple angles in super high definition, slow motion, we,
the viewers and the referees, are seeing things that no human eye can normally
see. This has created a whole new class
of judgments that did not exist before instant replay. The classic example is the “tuck rule”. We all know what happened in Oakland
in 2001 to propel Tom Brady and Adam Vinatieri to legendary status. In New England’s final
desperation drive, Brady dropped back to pass, but was sacked by Charles
Woodson, and fumbled the ball which was recovered by the Raiders. Game Over!
Every football fan in America,
even in Boston, knew it was a
fumble, but it was reversed.
Apparently, Brady brought his arm back to throw, and then changed his
mind, so while bringing the ball back into his body, it was knocked loose, but
somehow this is still considered an incomplete pass. I’ll get into the stupidity of this later,
but my point is that this would not have occurred without the over analysis
provided by instant replay. As a youth
watching football in the 70’s, this decision was much simpler—was his arm
cocked back to throw, and if it was, was it moving forward? If not, then it was a fumble. End of story. Now we have to listen to the referee who
made that call, Tim Donaghy, I mean Walt Coleman, explain how Brady had not yet
completed his “tuck” so it was an incomplete pass. Only using super slow motion could he come to
that conclusion. Some other judgments
that now have to be made due to instant replay:
Did the ball cross the plane of the goal line? Did the ground cause the fumble? Did he have control of a catch before going
out of bounds? My personal favorite, did
a player make a “football move” after a catch?
My solution to this is to have the referee only view replays
in real time. That way, he sees what the
players see and will not be tempted to overanalyze or get caught up in
minutia. As football fans, we realize
that the refs are human too and deserve to make judgments as humans, not as
robotic extensions of a slow motion camera.
Most of us just want to see the glaring errors removed.
That said, why not extend instant replay to all aspects of
the game. Currently replay cannot be
used to assist, for example, in pass interference calls. Presumably this is because these are judgment
calls that only a referee who is right there can make. We’ve all seen obvious contact and even
downright tackles which weren’t called and should have been, or minimal contact
which was called. This is as infuriating
to watch as an obvious missed fumble or an obvious catch out of bounds. In today’s NFL, it is conceivable that all 22
players on the field be watched by 22 cameras.
All their actions could be potentially reviewable. As a corollary to this, why not make every
play potentially reviewable? The way
replay is now set up, every play in the last two minutes of a half are
potentially reviewable by “the guys upstairs”, but they are limited to ruling
on fumbles, catches, etc. Let them
review every play throughout the game, just like we do when watching a game,
but give them more angles. In addition,
let them review and call penalties. One
thing that irks me as much as a bad call is no call when one should have been
made. Give the “guys upstairs” the power
to call and review penalties. Naysayers
would argue that this would make the game far to long. To this I would contend that if these
reviewers watched the game in real time and only made calls on obvious misses,
the game need not be any longer. Others
might argue that this would take the game out of the hands of the referees on
the field. To this I say “so what?” As long as the right call is made, who cares
who makes it.
|
Roughing the passer/In the grasp
Both of these rules were instituted in order to protect the
quarterback, arguably the most valuable player on the field, and probably on
the team. No doubt, it would be
disastrous for New England or Indianapolis
to lose Brady or Manning, but those teams do not need legislated means to
protect their quarterback. Both teams
have good offensive lines and both quarterbacks get rid of the ball early, so
they are not hit as often. If a team
does not want to get its quarterbacks hit, then it should spend its money and
draft picks on better offensive linemen, keep receivers in to block, and run
shorter patterns.
|
|
Following a game against the Browns in which he was flagged
for roughing the passer, Hall of Fame linebacker, Jack Lambert, suggested that
maybe quarterbacks should wear skirts.
It’s as if the quarterback is no longer a football player. This rule is on the mind of every pass
rusher. I remember a game last year
where a Cleveland player had
Roethlisberger sacked, but let up in order to avoid a roughing the passer
penalty. Big Ben then escaped and
completed the pass for a long gainer.
This rule puts defenders at a big disadvantage. Not only do they have to get by 300 lb
tackles, but when they arrive at the quarterback, they have to have the
foresight and body control to hit him below the shoulders and above the knees,
or to stop the rush if the ball has just been released. Part of the problem with this rule is that it
is so inconsistently called. I remember
a game in which the Steelers were playing Atlanta
last year, when Roethlisberger was clearly hit helmet to helmet and no penalty
was called. He suffered a concussion and
was out the rest of the game. In another
game last year, Justin Smith of the Bengals was called for a mysterious
roughing the passer penalty against Tampa
Bay. This allowed the Bucs to continue their drive
for a game winning touchdown. I’m not
even sure the quarterbacks are protected anyway. When Kimo von Oelhoffen was blocked into
Carson Palmer’s knee in the 2005 wildcard game, tearing his ACL,
no penalty was called.
The “in the grasp” ruling is also meant to protect the
quarterback, but mobile quarterbacks such as McNabb, Vick, Romo, McNair, and
Roethlisberger are hurt by this rule. I’m
not sure what the solution is here.
Obviously, the quarterback should be protected to some extent. With the emphasis on avoiding concussions,
the helmet to helmet rule will not be going away. Hitting a quarterback after he releases the
ball will always be a judgment call.
Perhaps all quarterback hits should be reviewed by “guys upstairs.”
Tuck rule
Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2, Note 2 of the rulebook
states:
"When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it
forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass,
even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it
back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and
then loses possession, it is a fumble."
Basically if a quarterback cocks his arm to throw and starts a forward
motion with the ball, but changes his mind, he is still considered in the act
of a forward pass until the ball is “tucked”.
According to Joe Gibbs, “It says you can pull [the ball] down and do
anything you want for the next 10 minutes. It makes no sense to me.” I think this is what most NFL fans think as
well. The rule has come up in the NFL competition committee to be changed, but no
one can come up with a suitable alternative.
To me, it’s not that complicated.
The rule was developed in 1999, probably because of instant replay. Before instant replay, the word “tuck”
probably was not in the referee’s vocabulary.
A ball was either passed or not.
It’s usually obvious when a quarterback intends to pass the ball, though
there will undoubtedly be grey areas that will require judgment. In Brady’s case, it was very obvious he was
not going to pass the ball. His intent
was to pull it down and either recock or run with the ball. Even by the letter of the rulebook, it was
not a pass, because as Walt Coleman later admitted, the ball was actually
moving backward, but somehow the tuck rule still applied. Why not let the referees judge the intent of
the quarterback? Referees are already
given the power to judge intent with roughing the passer penalties, so why
would this be any different?
Pass interference
Does it seem like pass interference is called much more than
it used to be. I bet if you asked Mike
Perreira, head of NFL officiating, about that, he would say something like “the
percentage of pass interference calls has remained about stable over the past 5
years.” Listening to him defend some of the calls made by his officials is like
listening to a tobacco lawyer argue that tobacco doesn’t cause lung cancer or
emphysema. Every football fan has a
memory in which their team lost a game because their player was called for a
mysterious pass interference or pass interference was not called when it should
have been. There was a famous quote usually attributed to Woody Hayes, but
actually spoken by a guy named Robert Neyland from the University
of Tennessee, which goes “When you
throw the ball, three things can happen -- and two of them are bad.” The two bad things are interception and
incompletion. Today the quote should go
“There are 4 things that can happen and two of them are good” -- the two good
things being completion and pass interference.
It’s gotten to the point where coaches should gameplan for interference calls. One of these days, a coach, with his team
backed up inside the 5 yard line, will be gutsy enough to call for 4
consecutive bombs with the hope that one will be caught or he will get a pass
interference call in his favor. My
solution is to have every pass interference call reviewed; and reversed only if
it is a blatantly obvious bad call.
There should also be a camera on every receiver so penalties not called
on the field could be called by the reviewers.
Several years ago, there was a new emphasis placed on
illegal contact with a receiver within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage. This was put into place because Patriot
defenders had absolutely mugged Indianapolis
receivers in the previous AFC championship
game. The rule had been around for
years, but was rarely called. Now it
seems like it’s called all the time.
Nothing infuriates me more than to see a stout defensive stand negated
by a ticky tack illegal contact foul giving the other team a first down. Like quarterbacks, maybe the receivers
should wear skirts. This rule should simply
be removed.
Cut blocks
Denver fans, at
least those of you who still might want to read my articles after I said your
team was overrated, may want to stop reading now. Cut blocks are simply blocks below the
knees. They are legal and every team coaches
their players to use them. Teams which
use the zone blocking techniques coached by offensive line coach Alex Gibbs,
namely Denver and Atlanta,
though take this to extremes. I heard
Randy Cross on Sirius NFL radio talk about cut blocking the other day. From what I understand, the offensive linemen
in this scheme are taught to block low, especially away from the line, and
sometimes from behind. This not only
takes the defenseman out of the play, but also makes him more cautious about a career
ending low block, possibly making him less effective. Zone blocking requires the offensive linemen
to take out the backside pursuit, and cut blocking is an effective way to
achieve this. It is considered by most
players to be dirty, but Denver
continues to use these techniques because they work. In Denver
and Atlanta where Gibbs has
coached, his teams have always been among the leaders in rush yardage. In Denver,
it is definitely the system which makes the running backs successful. Runners like Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, and Reuben Droughns who became
journeymen on other teams had great success in Denver
because of the system, and that system emphasizes cut blocking. Mike Shanahan vehemently defends his
lineman’s tactics, even going so far several years ago to show Bill Cowher a
tape of Steelers cut blocking. As I
said, every team cut blocks sometimes, but this technique seems to be essential
for Denver’s line to succeed. One thing that Shanahan cannot deny is that
there seem to be an inordinate number of defensive linemen who sustain season
ending ankle and knee injuries while playing the Broncos. In 2002, A cut block by a Denver
lineman ended Charger’s not tackle, Jamaal Williams’ season. On a Monday night game 2 years ago, a cut
block by Denver lineman George
Foster, ended the season and possibly the career of Cincinnati
defensive lineman Tony Williams. This
led to lots of discussion about making this block illegal, but nothing was
done. Last year, Tom Nalen was caught
firing out at Igor Olshansky’s knees on a play in which the Broncos were
spiking the ball to stop the clock.
Olshansky reacted by taking a swing at Nalen which drew a 15 yard
penalty. In 2001, another San
Diego lineman, Maa Tanuvasa suffered a season ending
ankle injury after a block by Matt lepsis.
This block drew a $15,000 fine.
The answer to this is easy. Make
cut blocks illegal, at least those that occur away from the line, or when a
defensive player is not expecting it, ie when he is away from the play, or
engaged with another lineman.
Some other rules that bug me:
Illegal celebration.
Why not let the players be themselves and enjoy the moment?
Why is it that every defensive penalty, except offsides, is
an automatic first down? It should only
be a first down if it results in the ball moving 10 yards past the original
line of scrimmage.
|
