It’s time for the NFL to adopt Bill Belichick’s “challenge everything” suggestion

Getty Images

Last night, in the aftermath a Monday night officiating blunder in Seattle that can’t be blamed on replacement officials, I suggested the formation of a committee that would scour the rule book, line by line, in an effort to identify all situations in which replay review should be available.

That approach would be far better than sitting back and waiting for the next situation that cries out for replay review, only to find out that replay review isn’t available.

There’s an even better approach. The NFL should adopt the suggestion from Patriots coach Bill Belichick that everything should be reviewable.

Specifically, coaches should be able to throw the red challenge flag in any situation. If indisputable visual evidence exists to rectify a mistake made on the field, why not give coaches a way to fix it?

One of the concerns raised by the NFL relates to the possibility that coaches will throw the red flag in desperation after a key play, hopeful that some obscure failure to, for example, throw a flag for holding away from the action will be caught via replay. But that possibility can be addressed by limiting challenges to portions of the play directly relevant to the outcome.

Like, for example, an illegal bat that the official who was looking right at the play failed to recognize.

118 responses to “It’s time for the NFL to adopt Bill Belichick’s “challenge everything” suggestion

  1. It’s PAST the time for the NFL to adopt Bill Belichick’s “challenge everything” suggestion

    Fixed that for you

  2. When will the day come when the NFL can no longer say, “Sorry, we were wrong, but you lose anyway” ?? Maybe Las Vegas would suffer too much of a financial loss.

  3. Its hard to fathom that no one on the Lions staff even had a thought to ask for clarification from the officials about the obvious batting of the ball by the defense out of the back of the end zone. Im sure I wasnt the only one watching who was expecting them to nullify the touchback due to the intentional batting of the ball. While the play may not be reviewable, the officials could have huddled and agreed that the player did indeed bat the ball and then make the correct call. That kind of thing happens all the time and doesnt require a challenge flag.

  4. But there is still a big problem with this. It was inside 2:00. So the Lions would not have been allowed to challenge anyway.

    Secondly, the NFL reviewed the play, because it was a turnover or scoring play, and they still missed it. So they missed it under review, how would review have helped it???

    I’m not saying that I disagree, I think Belichick is right far more often than he is wrong with regard to these things, I just cant see it making a difference last night.

    People wonder why Belichick is able to exploit rules, and loopholes and things like that. Because he knows the rules better than everyone else. About time people started listening to him

  5. realitycheckbaby says:
    Oct 6, 2015 10:23 AM

    Yes, we need more play interruptions.
    ================================

    You wouldn’t get more play interruptions, they would have the same number of challenges, 2. They should do it, since the Refs are basically so bad. That blunder cost the Lions the game last night.

  6. Look at the bright side at least the refs waited five whole games since the last time they completely bent us over.
    This was the last straw for me. While I’ll definitely continue to watch the Lions I will never, for the rest of my life, buy any official NFL merchandise or support the NFL financially in other way shape or form. We have enough problems on our own without the leagues officials constantly doing these things to us. This league is getting really scummy and the same few teams seem to keep benefitting from these “blown calls”

  7. Being able to throw the red flag would not have come into play last night, since there was less than two minutes left. In which case it would have to have been a booth review. The problem was not being able to throw the red flag, it was that the play was not reviewable.

    And if you take away the booth reviews and go to red flags only, when something like last night happens and the team is out of challenges, the complaint would be to bring back the booth reviews.

  8. So you want to replay for intent?

    Seriously the call was missed but in another scenario we would be replaying intent vs incidental and looking at whether the players hands were open in a reasonable attempt to catch the ball.

  9. Since each team has 2 challenges how will it lead to more stoppages??
    Would a team still had one left @ the end of the game, a smart coach of course would.

  10. I doubt you would see more challenges. Every coach will retain a challenge to deal with an issue like this. Losing a challenge to a 10 yard gain early in the third quarter and then not being able to challenge a call like this would be pretty painful.

  11. Some idiot when they first started replay though he was smart for keeping some plays off replay. This person is most likely still in involved in the process of changing the rules and is a pats hater. Sounds crazy but is most likely true and is comparable to Mike Kensil role in deflatgate.

  12. But that possibility can be addressed by limiting challenges to portions of the play directly relevant to the outcome.
    ———-

    No, because then you are then creating a whole other “judgement call” for the refs to screw up.

  13. I’m all for the Lions finally winning a game but what the hell is an “illegal bat”? So if he accidentally batted it out would it be a safety?

    I don’t blame the ref one bit. He just wants to get out of the stadium alive. Game over. At the end of the day it’s just a job.

  14. Roger Goodell and the owners are less interested in “getting it right” than they are about profits and making themselves look good

    That’s why Goodell went after Brady – because he looked weak and pathetic in his response to wife and child abusers

    Their opposition to an “everything is challengable”rule shows that they don’t want to make officials look bad for botching calls

  15. Furthermore, they should change the rule so that coaches get an unlimited number of challenges until they get two wrong instead of the current system of getting two right gets you a third.

  16. This coming from the guy who learns how to skew every rule for his advantage, it’s like asking the Joker if crime is ok in Gotham.

  17. Also, you would still have them challenge a specific aspect of the play. They can’t say “Review this play for anything that may have been wrong,” they would review that douchenozzle batted the ball out of the end zone. Seems like a good plan to me.

  18. And if we challenge the play, since it’s a judgement call and you can’t see “intent” on instant replay, the call on the field stands.

    How can the ref rule for certain that the player didn’t extend his arm to attempt to recover the loose ball, only to change his mind at the last second since the ball was headed out of bounds anyway?

    If you can show me an iron-clad way that the ref can prove that, I’m all for the rule change.

  19. jonathankrobinson424 says:
    Oct 6, 2015 10:24 AM
    …..Can we just make Bill Belichick commisioner once he hangs up his clip board with the Patriots.
    =======================================
    He would not have the patience to deal with the politics. They are better off with someone they can control rather than someone telling them what to do.

  20. General Lee A. Ware says:
    But there is still a big problem with this. It was inside 2:00. So the Lions would not have been allowed to challenge anyway.
    ___________________

    The Hoodie’s proposal was for all plays not automatically reviewed as well as at all times and included wording that the challenge be specific.

    It’s The Hoodie after all, of course he had all the bases covered. Guy is a walking football detail machine.

  21. realitycheckbaby says:
    Oct 6, 2015 10:23 AM
    Yes, we need more play interruptions.

    _________________________________________

    It wouldn’t cause more interruptions if you still limit the amount of challenges you can use. If you still give 2, and a 3rd if you win both, then coaches will use them accordingly and it will not take up any more time. How many coaches end their games with 2 or 3 challenges in pocket every Sunday?

  22. Wonder which way the Lions voted on the challenge everything referendum… Guess we know which way they’ll vote now.

  23. Love all the Vegas comments around bad officiating. Vegas makes money by pairing both sides of a bet against each other and taking a small slice of each. Spreads are just a way to entice bettors to take the side of the bet Vegas needs filled. Fixing games, juicing spreads, etc. etc. affects gamblers, not the house. Maybe you guys mean “the mob” when you say Vegas, but that is a stiff accusation indeed.

  24. The Lions wouldn’t have thrown the flag because they didn’t know the rule even existed. Mike Holmgren, who was on the competition committee for years, had never even heard of the rule.

  25. People should listen to Bill when he suggests something. He knows the rules better than the referees and he’s right. Every play should be allowed to be challenged. It won’t make the game any longer since they have the same number of challenges available.

  26. It does not matter if anyone coach or player was aware of the rule except the refs. That is their job and they failed, the NFL officials are a joke. I am done with the NFL no more merchandise, no more tickets to games, no more licensed products and after this season no more fantasy football. I am done with the crooked NFL and incompetent refs. That nice new communication stuff the refs are using is just letting the NFL manipulate the games.

  27. Bill Belichick is right, again! Listen and act, stop screwing a team like the Lions who gutted out a respectable comeback only to lose because the refs blew the call. If anyone should suffer on a call like that it should be the refs and the league not the team who is trying to do everything they can do win and their fans who were also stabbed in the heart for that loss.

  28. .
    Often times the key event in a game may be pass interference or a personal foul on a blow to the head. These calls are difficult for any official to get right 100% of the time in live action. Let the technology assist the officials.

    One thing we’ve learned from instant replay is that often times plays are so close a viewer at home needs several angles to reach a decision.
    .

  29. Belichick is right about everything football…all the whiners scream cheating but really he is miles ahead of all others throughout the league..from legal plays that Harbaugh whines about then uses to using 9 or 10 offensive linemen in situational play to moving the extra point back to the 15…cheating has never occurred it is just he is so far ahead of everyone else that they perceive it that way.

  30. I agree with this- but just make sure the ref is only looking for exactly what the coach says. Not “im sure there was holding in there somewhere”, if they say “#77 held #68) then look for that only, any other penalties seen in review don’t matter. WAY too many plays we cant review that are obvious- like last night. Absolutely no reason whatsoever to not be able to review that. We have limitations on how many challenges a coach gets, he wont be able to challenge 20 plays per game- this wont slow down the game that much.

  31. General Lee A. Ware says:
    But there is still a big problem with this. It was inside 2:00. So the Lions would not have been allowed to challenge anyway.

    —–

    The current rules do not allow for the replay booth to *add* a penalty that wasn’t called on the field. (Unless it’s a penalty that wasn’t initially called on an onside kick between the Rams and Seahawks, in which case it can somehow happen.)

  32. I think what happened last night SUCKS. But I also don’t want Pandora’s Box opens and have 4 plus hour games.

  33. I’m not a BB fan but I think he’s right on this one.

    Along with the change to being able to challenge any activity on the field, how about all of the field and replay officials be made full-time employees so that they all know the rule book? Last night it was obvious that the field officials as well as whoever it was in the booth reviewing the play had no knowledge of the rule.

  34. The number one problem is that the league refuses to make officials full-time employees, and that is reflected in the growing number of blown calls we all see every week.

    As part-time employees, the officials (most of them at least) all have other jobs, and just show up at their appointed game site. In a game as fast and as complex as the NFL, it would make far more sense to have them be full-time employees, so they could actually work at their craft (practice!). As full-time employees they would be required to attend training, video review, etc., all designed to make them more efficient and competent.

    Since the league refuses to do that, and blown calls continue to become a bigger issue, the next best thing is to have EVERYTHING be reviewable. That may not have helped the Lions last night since it was inside of 2 minutes, but I’m sure every team in the league would agree it is a good idea.

  35. I don’t think the League is going to pass this change because they know this kind of thing only happens to the Lions and they’re not going to change the process just for us.

  36. If it hasn’t occurred to anyone yet, let me propose an analogy. The dead fish rots from the head back. The NFL office in New York is, at best, a freshly dead fish. The Commish (head of said Fish) has filled the office with a bunch of functionaries who have, shall we say, kissed his ring. The fish is starting to rot, from the head back.

    Remember everyone waiting to eat pizza until the Commish showed up (I don’t care if it gets cold, no one eats until Emperor Ginger takes the first slice). The NFL offices isn’t about performance. It’s about pomp/circumstance, power, influence and pecking order. Intelligence is not rewarded. Forward thinking is frowned upon. Decisions are capricious and poorly thought out. As we speak, the NFL is continuing its lawsuit vs. Brady/NFLPA. Meanwhile, they can’t get simple reviews right.

    It’s sad to think that in a league where performance is everything, the League office can perform poorly, year after year, and nothing happens.

  37. “Yes, we need more play interruptions.”

    Reading comprehension. You need some.

    Nowhere does it say making everything open to challenges increases the number of challenges. The coaches would have the same number, its only the scope of what could be challenged that would change.

  38. Two extra officials in the booth reviewing every play. If a penalty that impacts the game or event that impacts the game occurs, call down to the field, and tell the head ump the answer. Could be done within 10-12 seconds — not even hurry up offenses would be disrupted

  39. Secondly, the NFL reviewed the play, because it was a turnover or scoring play, and they still missed it. So they missed it under review, how would review have helped it???
    —————————————————————-

    Probably wasn’t missed, but Blandino said on NFL network that it was a judgement call and they can’t reverse judgement calls. That is the issue when the ball was intentionally batted out of the endzone. You don’t run half the length of the end zone and “accidentally” hit the ball with your hand out the end zone.

  40. Umm…read the rule that was offered as explanation of this play…..it says when a “player punches a loose ball THAT HAS TOUCHED THE GROUND”…..this ball hadn’t touched the ground yet….it was punched out of Johnson’s grip and flew out into end zone…..it wasn’t a ball that was already on the ground that the defender knocked forward which is what the rule is saying (at least the rule that was given up as the guiding one for this play).

  41. I also finding amazing that in this day and age it’s still not always clear if someone broke the plane of the goal, or if a kick was through the uprights (particularly when it went over the height of the poles). They can fit cameras onto ants but not onto the goal line or both uprights? Come on.

  42. I always said, Belichick is ten steps ahead of everyone. I think he might actually be 100 steps ahead. Best coach, best GM, if commissioner he’d make it football again

  43. californiaqid says:
    In any real corporation, Dean Blandino would be a mid-level manager. We need to fix this now.
    ___________________________

    True, but in any real corporation Roger would only make it to CEO if he was a majority stockholder and Troy Vincent would be in the mail room not a corner office. There’s a lot that needs fixing.

  44. “One of the concerns raised by the NFL relates to the possibility that coaches will throw the red flag in desperation after a key play, hopeful that some obscure failure to, for example, throw a flag for holding away from the action will be caught via replay.”

    The way you fix that is, you make the coach say what specifically he’s asking the officials to review. In other words, you can’t say, “Look for holding,” you have to say, “We believe #66, or the left guard, held on that play.”

  45. “.it says when a “player punches a loose ball THAT HAS TOUCHED THE GROUND”…..this ball hadn’t touched the ground yet….it was punched out of Johnson’s grip and flew out into end zone….”

    Yes after which it hit the ground in the end zone and bounced up at which point it was batted out.

  46. I have yet to hear an explanation for why this isn’t already how it works. What is one rational argument for why some things should be able to be challenged, but not others? There’s no logic to it whatsoever.

    It’s probably just some kind of holdover compromise from back in the day when there was still some question as to whether we should have replay review at all. That ship has long since sailed, and if you’re going to have reviews, review it all.

  47. Belichick knows the rules better than anyone else including Dean Blandino and the officials apparently (or they were paid off by Vegas which would not surprise me). Everything should be reviewable with the 2 challenges that the coach has within any point of the game. I think the can’t challenge inside 2 minutes also needs to go because it cost the Lions dearly last night. Sorry Lions fans.

  48. Challenge anything you want. Successful challenge costs you nothing. Unsuccessful challenge costs you a time out. As long as you have time outs, you can challenge. No limit. So if you want to risk burning all your time outs on challenges, go nuts.

    As for lengthening the games, I’d rather actual game functions lengthen the game as opposed to the score/commercial/kickoff/commercial routine we get every single time.

  49. Last night’s Field Judge – Buddy Horton – was also on the crew of Pats/Dolphins in 2013 where an illegal batted ball penalty was called. I guess Buddy never learned from that miscall.

  50. For people saying its hard to question intent, keep the rules the same for replays. If it is beyond a reasonable doubt, overturn, if not the play stays the same. In this instance the player clearly batted it out intentionally and the ref just missed the rule. Blown call, that could easily be reversed.

  51. californiaqid says:

    In any real corporation, Dean Blandino would be a mid-level manager. We need to fix this now.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Most in positions of power in the NFL offices would be mid-level managers or even lower. I say move up the Admin Assts. and secrataries to the top positions and boot those in power, they can’t do any worse and may actually do a lot better.

  52. Rosevelt Colvin tweeted last night that the Patriots actually practiced when and what situations you can bat the ball. I think some of the Hoodie is a genius stuff is a tad overdone, but the man does mind the details.

  53. Eliminate challenges altogether. Automatically review turnovers and scores and leave everything else on the field.

  54. Why not simplify the rule book .. the rules, the pace of the game etc are ridiculous, and when a player cannot even know that something is illegal, how are they supposed to know not to do something. NFL is over officiated and over regulated. Make it more like the backyard football. Get the ball over the goal line or kick it between the uprights. It isnt that hard folks, unless you make it that way.

  55. To the dweebs who complain that this would slow down the game, being able to challenge everything maintains the integrity of the game as well as minimizes the under the table payoffs by Paul Allen and the Seahawks miracle non-calls or fake calls by the refs to keep giving them bogus cheating wins.

    Being able to Challenge Everything is needed as fans would rather have bad calls corrected than allow incompetent or corrupt officials rob their them and their team of a legit victory.

    Now I know Seahawks fans absolutely hate anything that would stop game officials from cheating for them (their Super Bowl win should be asterisked), but the rest of the league and fans should d mand this change to Protect the Integrity of the Game.

  56. bullettoothtony says:
    Oct 6, 2015 11:25 AM

    Umm…read the rule that was offered as explanation of this play…..it says when a “player punches a loose ball THAT HAS TOUCHED THE GROUND”…..this ball hadn’t touched the ground yet….it was punched out of Johnson’s grip and flew out into end zone…..it wasn’t a ball that was already on the ground that the defender knocked forward which is what the rule is saying (at least the rule that was given up as the guiding one for this play).

    ===================

    From which alternate reality were you watching this game? The ball bounced on the ground three times in the end zone before being batted out of bounds.

  57. 2001asterisk2003asterisk2004asterisk2014asterisk says:
    Oct 6, 2015 10:26 AM
    Might as well let a cheater make the rules. Obviously it’s legal in the NFL.

    ———————————————————-

    The Patriots live deep inside this ones head.

  58. big big problem, besides the ref(s) not knowing the tule, is that replay official, who is suppose to review scoring & change of possession had apparently left to take advantage of the shorter urinal lines!

    it’s time to stop placating the officials’ union and make all plays subject to challenges, particularly since they fail with, or shy away from, the BIG play calls

  59. Why is it illegal to batt a ball out of bounds anyways? Dumb. If they didn’t have the rule they wouldn’t have to worry about the botched call. Since they do have the rule and they didn’t call it they look incompetent, which leads toward the argument of challenging everything. Refs have proven time and time again that they are incapable of getting it right. I hope I don’t get fined for that last sentence.

  60. I agree with the New England Footballs teams head coach. But I had a fortune on the Seawhawks last night to win so glad to get a sneaky one through. Makes up for the money I lost on the Fail Mary.

  61. Chiefs game this weekend had a play reviewed when official said Kelce fumbled. Replay showed elbow hitting the ground while he had control of the ball and then the ball coming out. Announcers and Mike Carey said “no fumble”. Official reviewed it and “play stands”. Bengals ball and TD ensues in two plays. Refs must be rigging these games. Replay is pointless when the entire thing is rigged.

  62. For those of you s saying this couldn’t be fixed because it is inside 2 minutes they can easily fix this. If anything is reviewable with the red flag they could look at those same things with the booth looking at everything as well. If this happened to Dallas the rule would be changed already believe that.

  63. as a turnover, this shouldn’t have needed a challenge. just get rid of of judgement calls. any one who catches this plays can clearly see that he bats it out. I can’t imagine how this is considered a judgement call.

  64. I’ve said before that I think the NFL needs to allow every play to be reviewed, that the coaches should be not be charged for a challenge that they win, and that the NFL should hold the refs accountable for games with more than four successful challenges.

    It would make the games longer at first, but eventually with job security at stake, the refs would start to actually learn the rules of the game and how to enforce them. And possibly, the rule book would be simplified as well.

  65. 100 % agree with the challenge everything pertinent to the play aspect. Especially the Pass interference calls and these critical calls. Dont favor the non- PI calls but if they are reviewable then perhaps the officials will be more apt to throw them. Definitely should have thrown on in the New Orleans game on the INT that should have been PI and was not called. As long as you have challenges left and if the goal is to get things correct then throw the flags,. It would take no longer to play the game than now as the officials seem to be at the benches explaining things anyway.

  66. Why not simplify the rule book .. the rules, the pace of the game etc are ridiculous, and when a player cannot even know that something is illegal, how are they supposed to know not to do something. NFL is over officiated and over regulated. Make it more like the backyard football. Get the ball over the goal line or kick it between the uprights. It isnt that hard folks, unless you make it that way.
    ______________________________
    I agree completely, too many complicated rules that don’t make the game any better. In this case, where the ball is going through the endzone and 100% not recoverable by the Lions, tapping the ball out of the endzone a millisecond faster had no bearing on the outcome. Sort of like no pass interference on an un-catchable ball. The batting of the ball had no affect on the outcome, the ball was already going out, and not recoverable by the Lions.

  67. Belichick is a “true” genious. It seems the league hierarchy hesitates to listen to him for some reason…

    Guy knows more football than the rest of the league combined.

  68. “But that possibility can be addressed by limiting challenges to portions of the play directly relevant to the outcome.”

    Too much leeway there. I can see it now – every touchdown pass is going to be reviewed because some offensive lineman was “holding,” it should have been called and it is directly relevant to the outcome because it prevented a sack.

    NO. This is stupid. Why can’t we accept that humans are not infallible, mistakes happen, and we move on. Replay is useful in well defined, limited situations – and as we all know, sometimes even with replay they still, in hindsight, get it wrong.

    These arguments are heading for review of a ridiculous amount of plays – and it will kill the pace of the game.

  69. “But there is still a big problem with this. It was inside 2:00. So the Lions would not have been allowed to challenge anyway.

    Secondly, the NFL reviewed the play, because it was a turnover or scoring play, and they still missed it. So they missed it under review, how would review have helped it???”

    Because, as the current rule works, a penalty call/non-call cannot be challenged or overturned. It’s not necessarily that they “missed it” upon review, but rather that even if they HAD “caught it”, they had no power to declare a penalty after review; the rules don’t allow it.

    Bill’s suggestion allows ALL calls to be challenged; that includes penalties. For example, he’d like to be able to challenge and overturn a crucial pass interference that puts a team on the 1 yard line at the end of a game.

  70. skoobyfl says:
    Oct 6, 2015 10:37 AM
    This coming from the guy who learns how to skew every rule for his advantage, it’s like asking the Joker if crime is ok in Gotham.
    ———-
    Please explain this nonsense about “skewing” the rules. What does that mean exactly? Is there an example or is this just a thing people say to make themselves feel smart?

    Fascinating in contrast to these recent misses by the refs that the genesis of all of this Pats hating was a correct referee call, the tuck rule. Maybe that’s what the “Rule Bending” truthers are referring to ?

  71. elvoid says:
    Oct 6, 2015 12:15 PM
    “But that possibility can be addressed by limiting challenges to portions of the play directly relevant to the outcome.”

    Too much leeway there. I can see it now – every touchdown pass is going to be reviewed because some offensive lineman was “holding,” it should have been called and it is directly relevant to the outcome because it prevented a sack.

    NO. This is stupid. Why can’t we accept that humans are not infallible, mistakes happen, and we move on. Replay is useful in well defined, limited situations – and as we all know, sometimes even with replay they still, in hindsight, get it wrong.

    These arguments are heading for review of a ridiculous amount of plays – and it will kill the pace of the game.

    —-

    While I agree with most of your POV, the “pace” as you put it is already interrupted by commercials to a ridiculous level.

  72. The thing you are missing is that some calls are judgment calls. You can already review most things that can be determined black or white, but how do you review a judgment call? Pass interference is a judgment call, for instance. Incidental contact, an uncatchable pass, are judgment calls. If a back judge is staring at a play, sees contact, but determined that the ball was uncatchable how do you review that? Do you have some egghead with a scientific calculator plotting the receiver’s trajectory vs. the wind speed vs. the velocity of the throw?

    I agree there are more things that can be reviewed, but “everything” is just stupid. Like I’ve seen phantom blocks in the back called. If your defense is “I didn’t touch him. He flopped,” I see no reason that can’t be reviewed. Or if a guy gets called for unnecessary roughness on a hit to the head, why not be able to review whether there was actually head contact? Or illegal formations, offsides, and things that can be determined by looking at the film. Those are black and white things. But I don’t want them reviewing whether a pass was uncatchable or whether the ref missed illegal motion.

  73. Replacement officials at end of GB/Seattle game a couple of years ago: correct call.

    Officials last night: incorrect non-call

    Officials at Seattle/Rams game week one: no such thing as a fair catch on a free kick that has gone to the receiving team’s restraining line (otherwise know as ten yards from the spot of the kick.) And you all can dispute this but you’d be wrong.

    So, replacement refs on really big play got it correct and the regular guys got it wrong or did not see the obvious.

    Whom are we kidding?

  74. What was the referee’s stance on his call? “the player’s swipe was inadvertent…?” So, that makes it okay? Terrible call. No game check for the entire referee crew when a call costs a team a win.

    And why aren’t all calls reviewable, especially in the last two minutes, and when a team is within enough points to tie or win?

  75. “Bill Belichick’s “challenge everything” suggestion”

    What Belicheat is saying (without saying it) is ‘he intends to “challenge” the rules with every idea & chance he gets.’ He & Brady are both proven Cheaters & don’t deserve to be in the NFL!!!

  76. It’s really, really simple. Make everything reviewable in the endzone. Everything. Anything that may or may not result in points (TDs, 2 points conversion, extra point, field goal, safety), or change of possession (i.e. like last night’s play) should be reviewable. Make it reviewable by coach’s challenge and an official review.

    Otherwise, what is the point of having Bambino in New York overseeing the games as they happen, a la the NHL??? If Bambino or whoever in New York sees something, get on the horn with the officials at the game and tell them to review the play.

  77. agreed, challenge everything. You don’t need more challenges, just hold people accountable. Maybe one extra challenge after two successful ones.

  78. 1 a quarter. 4 total. Holding is unchallengeable, pass interference should be offensively and defensively. Ref should stand in middle of field and have nfl whisper in his ear after 30 seconds. Problem solved.

  79. The coaches should be able to challenge everything, but they only have the current 3 challenge system. If they want to burn one on a hold, let them.

  80. The officials in last night’s game did huddle after the fumble and they determined that the act wasn’t a bat. Probably based on the back judges opinion who is obviously blind or just a Seahawks fan. The dude put English on his touch of the ball how could they all not know it was intentional???? It’s obvious the NFL wants to leave the window open to fixing the games to their liking. Anyone who complains about the length of the games being extended doesn’t have money invested in seasons tickets to a club. Taking a extra five mins last night to make the correct call would have allowed a lot of people to go to bed without feeling cheated again.

  81. You can probably call a penalty on every single play if you scour it. Is that what we want to watch?

    It’s a game, lighten up.

  82. Coaches shouldn’t even have to challenge, every play should be reviewed “in-line” as in CFB. Drop the “human element” bull and get the calls right; it’s 2015 not 1975.

  83. dumbaseinstien says:
    Oct 6, 2015 1:22 PM
    “Bill Belichick’s “challenge everything” suggestion”

    What Belicheat is saying (without saying it) is ‘he intends to “challenge” the rules with every idea & chance he gets.’ He & Brady are both proven Cheaters & don’t deserve to be in the NFL!!!

    Please,
    Regale us with your proof.

  84. “Their opposition to an “everything is challengable”rule shows that they don’t want to make officials look bad for botching calls”

    And how’s that working out?

    We still know that they botched calls, it’s just that they cannot be fixed.

    Removing the power to fix mistakes doesn’t make the mistakes go away.

  85. ” You can already review most things that can be determined black or white, but how do you review a judgment call?”

    Well, there are two ways:

    a) you let the reviewer apply his own judgment (and what’s wrong with that?)

    b) you don’t let the reviewer overturn a judgment call (and what’s wrong with that?)

    Seriously, I don’t know why the NFL thinks it can make officiating completely mechanical so no judgment calls are ever needed. The quixotic pursuit of this goal has only led to absurdities like the current “When is a catch really a catch?” dilemma.

    Is it so hard to say “obvious mistakes should be reversed?”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.