If I was King of Sports #2- NFL Rule Changes

If I was king of sports, I would change 4 rules in the NFL.  Instead of making separate posts, I'll put them all in one blog.

1) Get rid of the pass interference penalty
Does anyone remember the original intent for this rule?  This has become one of the biggest "B.S." rules in football.  A cornerback plays great defense, and his reward is that he gets a flag thrown on him.  When I was a teenager, it was thought that the quarterback was the biggest "baby" in football.  However, thanks, in part, to the increased pass interference calls, the wide receiver now has that title, in my opinion.  Every time he drops a ball, he is crying for a flag.  There was more contact when we played three files up as kids.  In fact, that's my rule.  The contact that is allowed in a game of three flies up, would be allowed in football if I was king of sports, as long as the ball is in the air.  Defensive holding would still not be allowed.  If the defender actually grabs the receiver, then that would still be a penalty. 

The application of the current rule is worse in college football.  If the defender is not turned around when the ball is in the air, it's pass interference.  How is the defender supposed to know when the ball is in the air?  He is trying to cover the receiver.  What ends up happening is that the referees punish the defender, and to borrow a term from an announcer, he is rewarding the quarterback for a bad throw.  The receiver does have the right to get to the ball, but the defender should not have to get out of the way.  He was there first.  What is he supposed to do?  Get out of the way and just hope the receiver drops it?

I love football, and I want it to be a fair game for both the offense and defense, but the application of this rule has made it unfair for the defense.  If my rule does result in too much unnecessary roughness, then I would reluctantly bring the rule back, and make the NFL adapt to the college rule.  It would be a fifteen yard penalty and an automatic first down.

2) Redefine the "helmet-to-helmet" rule
I think the intent of this rule is a great one.  I do have a problem with the execution of the rule.  It was demonstrated in the San Francisco 49ers-Carolina Panthers game.  San Francisco linebacker, Dan Skuta, goes to make a sack on Panthers quarterback, Cam Newton on his blind side.  Skuta is in perfect, legal tackling position.  Newton suddenly turns his head to try to run the other way, collides with Skuta's helmet, and it is a 15-yard penalty on Skuta and an automatic first down.  (Two plays later, Newton threw an interception.) 

Another problem is when the defender goes to tackle the runner low, and the runner ducks his head down, and again, it's helmet-to-helmet, but the defender did not have time to change his momentum. 

If I was king of sports, I would have the referees use judgement.  If it was helmet-to-helmet, and the defender either attacked the runner, or if he had time to change his momentum, then the present rule would stand.  On the other hand, if the defender could not change his momentum, then it will be a 10-yard penalty, and there would be no automatic first down.  I know the application of the rule could make the game a few minutes longer, but I would not allow the offense to use the helmet as a weapon while the defender is stuck with a 15-yard penalty.

3) Redefine "process of a catch" rule
I am sure the "process of a catch" has always been the rule, but it was made famous a few years ago when the Detroit Lions lost to the Chicago Bears, because the Lions receiver, Calvin Johnson, I believe, dropped the ball at the end of his roll after he fell in the end zone.  Since that time, this has quickly become another "BS rule" in the infancy of the term.  Johnson caught the ball in the end zone, maintained possession until he landed and dropped the ball. The referees said that he did not complete "the process of the catch".

If I was king of sports, I would allow this rule be maintained in the field of play when fumbles are in question or if it was an incomplete pass.  However, if the receiver has possession when he is out of bounds or in the end zone, then it is a catch, period.

4) Stiff arms are ok, but if the runner grabs the defender's face make, 15-yard penalty on the runner.
One of the few things I never understood in sports is why is the defender not allowed to grab the face mask, but the offense is.  I understand and admire the stiff arm, but again, sports should be fair to both sides, and this is just not fair.  I have seen running backs get away with tugging the face mask in a stiff arm, but when a defender even grazes the face mask, even by accident, it is a 15-yard penalty.  Occasionally, the referees will call it on both sides on the linemen, but outside of that, I can literally count on one hand the amount of times I have seen the running back get flagged for the face mask.

Therefore, if I was king of sports, in interest of fairness for both sides, the stiff arm will continued to be admired, but if the face mask is grabbed, it would be a 15-yard penalty.