This one time I totally agree with Richard Sherman

[Prime Time]

Penalizing a team 40 or 50 yards for a pass interference penalty and affecting the outcome of a game is ridiculous. It should be a 15 yard penalty. Give the defensive backs some more leeway to engage with receivers, instead of penalizing them over and over and affecting the flow of the game. This is how it was done back in the day and it worked just fine.
******************************************************************************************
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...o-be-15-yard-penalty-for-offense-and-defense/

Richard Sherman wants pass interference to be 15-yard penalty for offense and defense
Posted by Curtis Crabtree on October 20, 2016

Getty Images

Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman absolutely interfered with Falcons receiver Julio Jones on Atlanta’s final offensive play Sunday. However, the flag never came out and Seattle was able to hold on for a 26-24 victory over the Falcons.

But if Sherman had his way with the rule book, the would-be penalty wouldn’t have been nearly as significant to the game’s outcome as it would have been under current rules.

Sherman believes pass interference should be a 15-yard penalty, and not a spot foul, for both offensive and defensive interference penalties.

“I’d make it 15 yards like college,” Sherman said Wednesday. “I’d make both 15 yards, offensive and defensive, because it’s not as much of a penalty. An offensive player can stop a turnover and it’s a 10-yard penalty and they might still get the first down. A defensive player, they can say, ‘Oh, he was about to stop a touchdown,’ so they give him a spot foul. That’s the difference.”

NCAA rules have pass interference as a 15-yard penalty for both offense and defense with defensive pass interference being a spot foul up to 15 yards.The current rules have offensive pass interference as a 10-yard penalty and defensive pass interference as a spot foul.

With Atlanta facing fourth-and-10 and needing to go at least 35 yards to get into field goal range with less than two minutes to play, Matt Ryan basically threw up a jump ball to Jones in the middle of the field where he was covered by Sherman and Earl Thomas. If the flag had been thrown, it would have been approximately a 37-yard penalty, which would have given the Falcons a likely chance to win the game on a field goal.

Sherman feels that the penalty is disproportionately weighted in the offense’s favor, especially when receivers can maul a defensive back in prime position for an interception with the only penalty being 10 yards and the chance to continue their possession.

“That’s the league you play in. Fourth-and-10 for the game, they can just throw one up and hope for a flag. Then you deal with that at the end. It is what it is and we won the game,” Sherman said.

Under Sherman’s scenario (with the penalty actually called), the Falcons would have had the ball at their own 40-yard line with around 90 seconds to play. It’s still a significant penalty assessed against Seattle’s defense but it wouldn’t have completely flipped field position on one play. Because of the spot foul part of the equation, it may also lead officials to not want to “bail out” a desperation jump ball opportunity with such a penal flag.

Sherman also doesn’t believe pass interference should be a reviewable penalty.

“If you watched every offensive snap of the line play in slow motion, it would look like a hold of some sort or hands to the face,” Sherman said. “You know, it’s just football. If you replay everything then it’s going to be on every play, every play on the line, every play on the secondary you can call, a penalty anytime, on both sides of the ball.”

 

[thirteen28]

I would make keep it a spot foul for flagrant, intentional interference (e.g., the DB is clearly beat and interference is the only way he can stop the receiver from scoring or otherwise making a huge play). But the unintentional variety, such as one where the QB just throws up the ball into a sea of bodies and hopes for something to happen, or the DB interferes not intentionally, but through misplaying the receiver or something ... yeah, that should only be 15.

I realize that's somewhat subjective, but PI already is subjective.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

It has to be a spot foul. Sherman is a jerkoff. When a dbs knows he is beat and the play would result in a touchdown, they intentionally commit pass interference. The ball goes to the spot. So, they get to prevent a touchdown. That could end up leading to only a field goal. So the DBs clearly have the advantage. Yet Sherman wants more? What a douche bag.

 

[snackdaddy]

To be honest I never liked the ball at the one yard line for PI in the endzone. I would agree with Sherman on this one. But I can see more intentional interference on defenders knowing its not gonna be a big play. If a defender is clearly beat deep while the ball's in the air they could just tackle the receiver from behind before the ball gets there and take the 15 yards.

 

[lordbannon]

I for one don't give a single iota of a crap about Sherman's opinion on pass interference. Seeing as how his reputation is built essentially on getting away with mugging receivers (and having Earl Thomas to clean up his mistakes), I feel he doesn't understand the core concept.

 

[bomebadeeda]

Despite of being a Squawk, Sherman is a rather sharp individual (Yeah, I didn't enjoy the taste I just had in my mouth for admitting it.....). But I have to agree about I think it would be good for the game to be a 15 yd penalty. His anology is correct. An offensive player can maul a defensive player and not only is it subjective to whether or not an official will throw the flag.... it's only a 10 yd penalty. But a defensive player in the same situation can get up to 2/3 of a field (a GB game this year yielded a 66 yd penalty.....).I understand what Elmgrovegnome is saying. But if it's flagrant a 2nd penalty could be used (defenseless player....). That would (try to...) keep it to somewhat "normal" penalties. And allow a better "hold" on the game instead of a ref afraid to throw a PI because of this circumstance or that one. It would allow things to be (hopefully...) more consistant, instead of one guy calling a ticky tack foul and another saying "No autopsy....no foul....".
Good discussion though......even though it was initiated by a 'Hag.......

 

[bubbaramfan]

QB's have used the PI as an offensive wepon ever since the rule change. Tom Brady uses it whenever the Pats are losing and its late in the game. toss it up and hope for a PI to get a new set of downs or in range for that game winning FG. It sucks that one penalty at the end of a game can negate a whole 3 plus quarters of by changing field position by 50 or more yards.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

To be honest I never liked the ball at the one yard line for PI in the endzone. I would agree with Sherman on this one. But I can see more intentional interference on defenders knowing its not gonna be a big play. If a defender is clearly beat deep while the ball's in the air they could just tackle the receiver from behind before the ball gets there and take the 15 yards.

Exactly. So why should it only be fifteen yards. Because Sherman has made a living mugging receivers?

 

[Prime Time]

It has to be a spot foul. Sherman is a jerkoff. When a dbs knows he is beat and the play would result in a touchdown, they intentionally commit pass interference. The ball goes to the spot. So, they get to prevent a touchdown. That could end up leading to only a field goal. So the DBs clearly have the advantage. Yet Sherman wants more? What a douche bag.

The problem with that is that the refs calls are not consistent. The Patriots for example are good for business when they win, so they get the benefit of the doubt. Other teams are not treated the same way. This flagrant use of penalties to reward one team and punish another is one of the reasons that fans are losing interest in the game.

Exactly. So why should it only be fifteen yards. Because Sherman has made a living mugging receivers?

Let's face it, penalties could be called on almost every passing play. There's usually always contact on both sides. Sherman is one of the worst offenders to be sure and probably shouldn't be the one to bring this topic up, but he's still right.

I think @thirteen28 makes the most sense on this.

I would make keep it a spot foul for flagrant, intentional interference (e.g., the DB is clearly beat and interference is the only way he can stop the receiver from scoring or otherwise making a huge play). But the unintentional variety, such as one where the QB just throws up the ball into a sea of bodies and hopes for something to happen, or the DB interferes not intentionally, but through misplaying the receiver or something ... yeah, that should only be 15.

 

[lordbannon]

QB's have used the PI as an offensive wepon ever since the rule change. Tom Brady uses it whenever the Pats are losing and its late in the game. toss it up and hope for a PI to get a new set of downs or in range for that game winning FG. It sucks that one penalty at the end of a game can negate a whole 3 plus quarters of by changing field position by 50 or more yards.

For that, I feel like there should be some difference in the penalty between a receiver getting assaulted, and those times where the QB just intentionally underthrows a deep ball and the receiver comes back through the DB. But since PI itself is a judgement call, that would just be a judgement on top of a judgement. So who knows...

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Despite of being a Squawk, Sherman is a rather sharp individual (Yeah, I didn't enjoy the taste I just had in my mouth for admitting it.....). But I have to agree about I think it would be good for the game to be a 15 yd penalty. His anology is correct. An offensive player can maul a defensive player and not only is it subjective to whether or not an official will throw the flag.... it's only a 10 yd penalty. But a defensive player in the same situation can get up to 2/3 of a field (a GB game this year yielded a 66 yd penalty.....).I understand what Elmgrovegnome is saying. But if it's flagrant a 2nd penalty could be used (defenseless player....). That would (try to...) keep it to somewhat "normal" penalties. And allow a better "hold" on the game instead of a ref afraid to throw a PI because of this circumstance or that one. It would allow things to be (hopefully...) more consistant, instead of one guy calling a ticky tack foul and another saying "No autopsy....no foul....".
Good discussion though......even though it was initiated by a 'Hag.......

DBs do it all of the time. They are coached to do it. If they know they are beat they intentionally interfere to prevent the catch and the TD. It is a smart play, but there has to be a consequence. If Britt goes deep and the ball is on target and the only thing between him and the goal line is green grass, then the trailing db, out of desperation will do whatever it takes to stop the catch, including pass interference. Then if the team sucks in the red zone and settles for a field goal that pass interference resulted in preventing 4 points.

And please stop with the Sherman is intelligent stuff. Don't confuse being well spoken with intelligence. Lots s of people can speak, but are not actually revered for their intelligence. Sure he went to Stanford.....and eeked by. How do you know if he even legitimately qualified for Stanford. Harbaugh was the coach and is the dirtiest, most ruthless recruiter in the country. Sherman's topics are always twisted with an agenda and he has never come across as intelligent to me.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

The problem with that is that the refs calls are not consistent. The Patriots for example are good for business when they win, so they get the benefit of the doubt. Other teams are not treated the same way. This flagrant use of penalties to reward one team and punish another is one of the reasons that fans are losing interest in the game.



Let's face it, penalties could be called on almost every passing play. There's usually always contact on both sides. Sherman is one of the worst offenders to be sure and probably shouldn't be the one to bring this topic up, but he's still right.

I think @thirteen28 makes the most sense on this.

So instead, Sherman should be saying he wants impartial refs. I don't see how anyone can say that a DB can interfere to stop a sixtty yard TD score and it should only be a fifteen yard penalty.

And bias refs are a part of the game. We as Rams fans should be well aware of that. And why is this guy whining anyway? Sherman already gets away with murder the way it is. He just did again last Sunday.

 

[whitedk57]

It has to be a spot foul. Sherman is a jerkoff. When a dbs knows he is beat and the play would result in a touchdown, they intentionally commit pass interference. The ball goes to the spot. So, they get to prevent a touchdown. That could end up leading to only a field goal. So the DBs clearly have the advantage. Yet Sherman wants more? What a douche bag.

That's exactly right! Pass interference calls will multiply if this occurs.

Shut up, Sherman! You're drunk!

 

[Mikey Ram]

Tough cal on this one...I see and agree with the concept except that it's not a little subject, it's very much so...That play referenced Sherman clearly pulled down his left arm...That was clearly intentional yet no flag was thrown...I'm not to sure that intent should be a subjective call...I could probably be pretty easily talked into either side of this one..I'm more concerned with other bad rules...I've despised the rule allowing a QB to throw it out of bounds to avoid a loss...How is that fair ??? It's to protect the QB but I think they've gone way to far in that regard..The QB slide rule is another abused by Wussell (and others of course) by allowing them to bait the defensive player with a way too late slide..

 

[Prime Time]

It is a smart play, but there has to be a consequence.

The consequence is too great. That's the point of this thread. If the refs called it consistently that would be another matter. But they don't. What would be better for ratings in the Super Bowl? The Patriots vs. the Seahawks or the Rams vs. the Browns? The refs influence the outcome of the games way too much to the point that conspiracy theories have popped up from time to time.

And please stop with the Sherman is intelligent stuff. Don't confuse being well spoken poken with intelligence. Looks s of people can speak, but are not actually revered for their intelligence. Sure he went to Stanford.....and eeked by. How do you know if he even legitimately qualified for Stanford. Harbaugh was the coach and is the dirtiest, most ruthless recruiter in the country. Sherman's topics are always twisted with an agenda and he has never come across as intelligent to me.

You posted this under my quote so I'll have to correct you on this. Nowhere did I claim that Richard Sherman is intelligent or well spoken. In fact, I don't like the guy, not because he's a Seahawks player, but because he comes off like a jerk.

 

[DaveFan'51]

" If Sherman's for it, I'm against it!"

 

[bomebadeeda]

DBs do it all of the time. They are coached to do it. If they know they are beat the intentionally interfere to prevent the catch and the TD. It is a smart play, but there has to be a consequence. If Britt goes deep and the ball is on target and the only thing between him and the goal line is green grass, then the trailing db, out of desperation will do whatever it takes to stop the catch, including pass interference. Then if the team sucks in the red zone and settles for a field goal that pass interference resulted in preventing 4 points.

And please stop with the Sherman is intelligent stuff. Don't confuse being well spoken poken with intelligence. Looks s of people can speak, but are not actually revered for their intelligence. Sure he went to Stanford.....and eeked by. How do you know if he even legitimately qualified for Stanford. Harbaugh was the coach and is the dirtiest, most ruthless recruiter in the country. Sherman's topics are always twisted with an agenda and he has never come across as intelligent to me.

I hear what you are saying. But history has shown the most ruthless are usually some of the smartest because they can infuse their perspective in on any situation. But that's just my opinion...... I could be wrong.......

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

The consequence is too great. That's the point of this thread. If the refs called it consistently that would be another matter. But they don't. What would be better for ratings in the Super Bowl? The Patriots vs. the Seahawks or the Rams vs. the Browns? The refs influence the outcome of the games way too much to the point that conspiracy theories have popped up from time to time.



You posted this under my quote so I'll have to correct you on this. Nowhere did I claim that Richard Sherman is intelligent or well spoken. In fact, I don't like the guy, not because he's a Seahawks player, but because he comes off like a jerk.

I went back and read the thread. It is in reply to Bomba

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

The consequence is too great. That's the point of this thread. If the refs called it consistently that would be another matter. But they don't. What would be better for ratings in the Super Bowl? The Patriots vs. the Seahawks or the Rams vs. the Browns? The refs influence the outcome of the games way too much to the point that conspiracy theories have popped up from time to time.



You posted this under my quote so I'll have to correct you on this. Nowhere did I claim that Richard Sherman is intelligent or well spoken. In fact, I don't like the guy, not because he's a Seahawks player, but because he comes off like a jerk.

The consequence is correct. In some cases it is not enough. If a pass to the thirty is clearly going to be a touchdown, if caught, but the DB interferes to prevent that, then the ball is placed at the thirty where the int was committed. It could be argued that it should be at the one, since it was 99% guaranteed that it was a touchdown. Placing it at the thirty gives the defense the benefit of the chance that the pass may have been dropped or the receiver falls down.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that rule. It makes perfect sense. The problem is with the refs. If you change it Pass interference will be happen too often because the consequence is too small. And who wants to see the Rams and Browns in the Super bowl?

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Exactly. So why should it only be fifteen yards. Because Sherman has made a living mugging receivers?

@PowayRamFan I am confused. How is that inappropriate? Sherman is the most physical, before the pass gets there, corners in the league.