Is it time to change the defensive pass interference penalty?

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-interference-could-become-a-15-yard-penalty/

Troy Vincent: Defensive pass interference could become a 15-yard penalty
Posted by Mike Florio on February 24, 2015

In past years, teams periodically have pushed for a transformation of the defensive pass interference penalty from being a spot-foul to a 15-yard walk-off. Recently, there’s been no momentum toward making a change of that nature.

There may be now.

NFL executive V.P. of football operations Troy Vincent told Judy Battista of NFL Media that the league may explore making defensive pass interference a 15-yard penalty as an alternative to making pass interference subject to replay review.

While that tends to take the sting out of a bad pass interference call, it creates a fresh incentive for defensive backs to tackle any receivers who get behind them. Why not gladly give up 15 yards in lieu of being burned deep?

It makes much more sense to make pass interference subject to replay review, as the CFL did in 2014. Getting it right should be about getting it right, not reducing dramatically the potential consequences of getting it wrong.

Far better than to make defensive pass interference a 15-yard penalty would be to create two tiers of pass interference, as there is for roughing/running into the kicker and as there used to be for face mask fouls. While far from a perfect outcome, it’s much better than removing the spot-foul outcome of defensive pass interference.

 

[Memento]

Make it two tiers. Makes all kinds of sense. Fifteen yards if it's minor, spot of the foul if it's major.

 

[FrantikRam]

15 yard penalty (or spot foul less than 15 yards) is the best solution. Fresh incentive to tackle them if they get behind them??? They can just grab and hold them now and only get hit with a 5 yard penalty (before the ball is in the air at least). Making it reviewable would be nice, but it's still like a foul in the NBA - guys can flop and that'd be hard to catch on a review.

 

[HE WITH HORNS]

Just make it reviewable. It's such a game changing call, that one bad PI call can change the outcome of the game.

 

[dieterbrock]

I hate the "judgement call" like deciding between roughing the kicker or running in to the kicker, but for infractions outside of 15 yards, it has to be done.
Otherwise, if a guy is beat on a deep route its a no brainer to take the PI

 

[thirteen28]

Two tiers.

15 yards for the non-flagrant PI e.g., the guy plays the man instead of the ball and interferes even though he wasn't necessarily trying to interfere.

Spot foul or 15 yards (whichever is greater) for flagrant, intentional PI, e.g., when a DB is clearly beat and intentionally interferes to avoid giving up a big gain/TD/first down, etc.

 

[Jorgeh0605]

I would create two tiers or just make it reviewable. The intentional fouls in basketball make the ending super drawn out and convoluted. I don't want to deal with that in football.

 

[RamFan503]

What about keeping it a spot foul inside one minute of the end of a half and otherwise make it a 15 yarder and automatic first down. There is already plenty of incentive for a DB to grab a guy that is getting past him. We see it without the rule change. I'm not sure a DB is going to play any different during most of the game. If he's in position to grab the guy, he is also in position to potentially make a play. If he doesn't have the confidence to make a play, do you want him?

 

[RamFan503]

I would create two tiers or just make it reviewable. The intentional fouls in basketball make the ending super drawn out and convoluted. I don't want to deal with that in football.

But how many of us are going to lose our shit when Sherman gets flagged for five yards on the same level of PI that we get tagged for a spot foul?

 

[Memento]

But how many of us are going to lose our crap when Sherman gets flagged for five yards on the same level of PI that we get tagged for a spot foul?

I'd be furious, but I'm not at all suggesting that. Fifteen yards for minor pass interference (like in college), spot of the foul on major pass interference. Makes too much sense.

 

[Jorgeh0605]

But how many of us are going to lose our crap when Sherman gets flagged for five yards on the same level of PI that we get tagged for a spot foul?

Fans being disappointed with the call is just the way the game goes as far as I'm concerned. No matter what option you choose, some fans are not going to be happy about a call if it doesn't go there way. That is just a fact of life.

 

[jjab360]

I'd be furious, but I'm not at all suggesting that. Fifteen yards for minor pass interference (like in college), spot of the foul on major pass interference. Makes too much sense.

But how do you objectively define the difference?

 

[Jorgeh0605]

I'd be furious, but I'm not at all suggesting that. Fifteen yards for minor pass interference (like in college), spot of the foul on major pass interference. Makes too much sense.

To expand on this, I think specific actions will need to be defined as "Major" PI. Tackling the receiver, grabbing their facemask, etc. I don't actually think fouls like that happen often as it stands. Most PI's called last year were definitely minor PI's. The major PI rule is just there to discourage cheating by simply taking 15 yards instead of getting beat.

 

[theramsruleUK]

The way the Super Bowl was officiated was perfect for me. Hardly any breakages for Defensive PI, aggressive cornerbacks jamming down the field. Proper football

Changing to a 15 yard penalty might help that so I'm all for it

 

[Memento]

But how do you objectively define the difference?

Exactly how Jorge stated it.

 

[RamFan503]

I'd be furious, but I'm not at all suggesting that. Fifteen yards for minor pass interference (like in college), spot of the foul on major pass interference. Makes too much sense.

I dunno man. As bad as the refs are, do we really need to give them yet another subjective call to make? What constitutes major? That the guy would have scored? That the DB wasn't making a real play on the ball? A hit like McLeod made last year? As little subjectivity as we can put in the refs hands the better as far as I'm concerned.

Fans being disappointed with the call is just the way the game goes as far as I'm concerned. No matter what option you choose, some fans are not going to be happy about a call if it doesn't go there way. That is just a fact of life.

I'm just looking at how games get called and how certain players get benefit of the doubt calls. I can see this being easily abused even if not consciencely.

 

[Memento]

I dunno man. As bad as the refs are, do we really need to give them yet another subjective call to make? What constitutes major? That the guy would have scored? That the DB wasn't making a real play on the ball? A hit like McLeod made last year? As little subjectivity as we can put in the refs hands the better as far as I'm concerned.

The offender making a play on the receiver and not the ball (i.e., actually tackling them before the ball even gets there and not making a hit to jar the ball loose or grabbing them by the facemask or collar). A hit like McLeod made on Sanders? Clean. Doing what some of the college cornerbacks do to receivers when they get beat? Automatic major. Grabbing the jersey or something like that? Minor PI.

 

[RamFan503]

The offender making a play on the receiver and not the ball (i.e., actually tackling them before the ball even gets there and not making a hit to jar the ball loose or grabbing them by the facemask or collar). A hit like McLeod made on Sanders? Clean. Doing what some of the college cornerbacks do to receivers when they get beat? Automatic major. Grabbing the jersey or something like that? Minor PI.

To me though it is a bigger issue if a guy grabs a jersey because the WR fools him and is going to score a sure TD. I'd just prefer the refs get better at what they already have on their plate. Quit moving the target.

 

[dieterbrock]

To me though it is a bigger issue if a guy grabs a jersey because the WR fools him and is going to score a sure TD. I'd just prefer the refs get better at what they already have on their plate. Quit moving the target.

Now we're talking
Define the rule and administer consistently. Why is that too much to ask??

 

[snackdaddy]

I've never been a fan of putting the ball on the one for ticky tacky interference calls in the endzone. Its almost an automatic TD at that point. Anything that would change that rule I'm all for it.