Remember the Catch That Wasn't a Catch? Well, Next Year it Might Be a Catch Again

…. are confused enough as is and another rule change will just further their confusion . This rule has both helped us and hurt us and I for one say just leave it as is . Make the player complete the play instead of getting up to celebrate a bit early .

heard polian, mort, schefter and a few others say that they would look at it but in the end they do not think the rule will change after the game….There was no “outrage” by anyone with in the NFL “community” that thought it was a catch….Only the media…..polian even stated that he likes the rule as it is now and the official made the right call…..

to be expected to hold on to the ball after catching it. And truth be told, I don’t think he could’ve hung on to that ball.

I don’t care either way, odds are this rule no matter how it is written or one like it will end up screwing us in the future. This time it wasn’t us, next time we might not be on the winning side, it is what it is. Don’t they have anything better to do, like I dunno get the CBA taken care of so we have football next year.

As it is right now, the rule leaves no room for discretion for a ref to make the right call. Mega’s non-catch was the exception to the rule. It was a catch cause he wasn’t falling to the ground, instead he was getting up from the ground.

At least revise it.

Please for the love of Ditka make it unnecessary roughness FOR ALL!! Enough treating the QB with special rules just to increase the passing game. There are those of us who love good defense, and we don’t get to see it much anymore.

worthy of it’s own thread.

Obviously, these are all just my opinions, but I’ve given them some thought.

There’s two reasons I can think of for not calling roughing on running backs,in the same way they call them for qb’s.

1) It would slow the game to a crawl. There could be a flag for every run up the middle. Too many calls. So many, in fact I bet offenses would start running it just to try and draw the flag.

2) There has to be a balance between the aesthetics of the game, and protection of investment. The league will always make a big show of promoting safety (but only when called upon by outside interests, NEVER on their own) but action, and top quality action, is where their profits lie.

Look at it this way; If the NFL was YOUR product, which is better for you, a Bears offense run by Todd Collins (or Caleb Hanie), or a Bears offense with Chester Taylor taking most of the snaps?

If your league is best promoted by long passes and acrobatic catches, the drop off of offensive quality between your starter and your backup qb, is much higher than it is for your RB.

Because it’s about marketability, as well. Remember ‘in the grasp’? It was designed for qb safety, but they scrapped it. Why? Because qb’s hated it, but also because it wiped out the action of a mobile qb scrambling away from a tackle.

If the league was that serious about qb safety, they would have kept the rule. How many times have you seen one rusher grab the qb (in the grasp) and slow him down just enough for another guy to lay him out?

Professional sports is an almost entirely visual product. Every decision they make, is filtered through the concern of how the game looks, in action.

I’m just describing motivation, not agreeing with it.I think I’ve also noticed a trend with some teams, like the Steelers, and the Ravens, who just look on the occasional roughing call, as the price of doing business.

I think that the PI rules have gotten too strident as well. Make that receiver go up and get that ball.

but im glad it wasnt…. OH YEAH