Penalties

[HumanCockroach]

Wasn't implying anything else, just pointing out what some folks see is all. My Brother in law who is MUCH more reserved in acknowledging any or all discrepencies in calls, even pointed it out to me with a "what the hell?" Question afterwards. I could care less about a fist bump, I personally care only about a game being officiated fairly, both ways, each and every game. To date ( though I might agree the Philly game was, whether Seattle had to go full "WWE" or not to GET them to throw a friggen flag). I don't want preferrential treatment because we are the Champs, I just want the same calls to go BOTH ways for a nice change.

[RiverDog]

Wasn't implying anything else, just pointing out what some folks see is all. My Brother in law who is MUCH more reserved in acknowledging any or all discrepencies in calls, even pointed it out to me with a "what the hell?" Question afterwards. I could care less about a fist bump, I personally care only about a game being officiated fairly, both ways, each and every game. To date ( though I might agree the Philly game was, whether Seattle had to go full "WWE" or not to GET them to throw a friggen flag). I don't want preferrential treatment because we are the Champs, I just want the same calls to go BOTH ways for a nice change.

Because I researched the penalty thing so much here in the past week, I paid extra special attention to how the game was officiated this last Sunday, and I honestly don't think that Hawk fans have a reason to complain. The only penalty I saw that was clearly missed that would have benefited us was the blow to Russell's head. Kelly's whining about the refs not calling Russell for intentional grounding led to the Philly fans thinking they were robbed, but the reality is that there was no single missed call or even series of missed calls that would have changed the outcome of that game. Our defense looked like the Norwegians clubbing seal pups.

[HumanCockroach]

I agree which is why I pointed out that this past game was the most evenly called game of the year for Seattle. There were a few other missed calls in that game ( a false start and an offsides by Philly that were missed) but as a whole, it wasn't drastically one sided. I do find it sad that Seattle almost HAS to act to get calls, but regardless, for once, it was an evenly called both ways.

[Hawktawk]

I though Baldwin was interfered with which was a no call on the first one. Also maybe someone needs to educate me but on Phillys first TD it looked like a blocker was engaged on a Seattle defensive back before the ball was thrown. Isn't that a penalty? Overall though I thought it was pretty reasonably officiated.

[HumanCockroach]

I though Baldwin was interfered with which was a no call on the first one. Also maybe someone needs to educate me but on Phillys first TD it looked like a blocker was engaged on a Seattle defensive back before the ball was thrown. Isn't that a penalty? Overall though I thought it was pretty reasonably officiated.

Pass was behind the line of scrimmage ( not really, but I guess it was close enough, just like SD victory over Baltimore the week before. Reciever and lineman can engage, if throw is behind LOS, both times it wasn't,but there must be some grey area on the matter).

[RiverDog]

Just noticed an interesting stat, regarding penalties. The Seahawks are among the most penalized teams in the league, if not the most. They have 110 penalties when on offense, which is the most in the whole NFL. But, on defense they have 55 penalties (exactly half, interestingly), which is the fewest in the NFL. So much for the defense being too physical, and all that.

My perception is that we have way to many pre snap penalties, which seems a matter of concentration, and should be correctable.

That was part of my argument last week. We have had way more presnap penalties, both in terms of total presnap and as a percentage of all penalties, by far, than any other team. As you noted, we have had 51 presnap penalties. The next closest it Tampa Bay with 41. Presnap penalties are the easiest and most objective calls for a ref to make. And just to further your observation of the lack of "physical" penalties called on the defense, many of our defensive penalties are presnap as well. We lead the league in defensive offside and are tied with Baltimore for neutral zone infractions. All too many times, we shoot ourselves in the foot. It's an attribute of Pete Carroll coached teams.

The rub was the number of penalties called on our opponents. We are by far the least beneficiary of penalties called. Our opponents only get flagged for 4.23 penalties per game. Even when we play heavily penalized teams, our opponents aren't drawing flags at the rate at which you would normally expect.

[Hawktawk]

No calls are as big as bad calls, sometimes worse. Ive been on the bandwagon for decades.

[Long Time Fan]

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/pat ... nt-over-13

16.1 penalties a game on average; how sick is that number?

It occurred to me watching a game last week that one reason for the increase in actual penalties as opposed to the increase in penalties called (two separate issues), is that today's players are just bigger, faster, stronger. You watch an ultra fast DE rush past an OT and the OT has no choice except to grab the DE or get his qb killed. Same with secondary guys grabbing the" got loose" WR.

Of course the tight and tightly enforced rules, the offensive bent NFL, and the tiresome pre-snap penalties, have led to the increase in penalties, but overmatched players are still the culprits for many of the penalties.

[NorthHawk]

So if we are seeing a marked increase in pre-snap and holding penalties on OLs throughout the league, how does it get fixed if the issue is 'athletic imbalance' (to coin a phrase) in favor of the Defense?
One way would be to move the DL off of the ball a half or full yard. That would give the OL time to set up.
It would fit with the Offensive focus of the NFL, but it would be real difficult to adjust to so probably unrealistic.
Maybe allow the Tackles some latitude to move early?

[HumanCockroach]

So if we are seeing a marked increase in pre-snap and holding penalties on OLs throughout the league, how does it get fixed if the issue is 'athletic imbalance' (to coin a phrase) in favor of the Defense?
One way would be to move the DL off of the ball a half or full yard. That would give the OL time to set up.
It would fit with the Offensive focus of the NFL, but it would be real difficult to adjust to so probably unrealistic.
Maybe allow the Tackles some latitude to move early?

I think the easiest solution if you were convinced you wanted to help the offenses even more than they already are ( something I'm insanely against) you could allow the tackles to line up further in the backfield ( say top of helmet off Guards but cheek) it would allow a little time and space for a lineman to be able to set himself , however, this also creates issues with safety ( more space leads to more speed and damage) and could create an advantage for the defense against the run ( better for the D-line to be engaged quickly, and not allow space, or seperation). Actually, this follows along with what the NFL wants ( NBA highscoring fantasy loving, pass heavy, chicks dig the long ball, no defense, no TOP, no run game, protected superstars etc) almost perfectly.

IMO it's pretty stupid, but if that is what people want, it could be done fairly easily. Course the amount of offsides might actually increase as DL try to compensate for the additional ground they have to cover.

[RiverDog]

So if we are seeing a marked increase in pre-snap and holding penalties on OLs throughout the league, how does it get fixed if the issue is 'athletic imbalance' (to coin a phrase) in favor of the Defense?
One way would be to move the DL off of the ball a half or full yard. That would give the OL time to set up.
It would fit with the Offensive focus of the NFL, but it would be real difficult to adjust to so probably unrealistic.
Maybe allow the Tackles some latitude to move early?

I don't see it as being that big of an issue to where we want to start messing with the game again. IMO one of the problems football has to begin with is that they change the rules so often that it's hard for players and coaches to keep up with them.

Speaking of rule changes, I heard that they're going to experiment in the Pro Bowl with shortening the width of the goal posts.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -pro-bowl/

[Long Time Fan]

I heard that they're going to experiment in the Pro Bowl with shortening the width of the goal posts.

I agree that too many alterations ebb at the essence of the game, but I like the spirit of the idea of tightening the width of the goal posts. 50 yard fgs have become routine, 40+ yards fgs nearly automatic. Tougher fgs will lead to more of the "go for it" attitude that pervades the new NFL. I like this sort of risk/return change as opposed to the unleveling of the field rules that handcuff the defense.

When Hkick pauses at the thought of a 50ish yard fg in the NFCCG, this lead to one one the biggest plays in Seahawks history.

[RiverDog]

I agree that too many alterations ebb at the essence of the game, but I like the spirit of the idea of tightening the width of the goal posts. 50 yard fgs have become routine, 40+ yards fgs nearly automatic. Tougher fgs will lead to more of the "go for it" attitude that pervades the new NFL. I like this sort of risk/return change as opposed to the unleveling of the field rules that handcuff the defense.

When Hkick pauses at the thought of a 50ish yard fg in the NFCCG, this lead to one one the biggest plays in Seahawks history.

They're tightening them by quite a bit, from 18.5' to 14'. That's a 25% reduction. That would have a dramatic impact on play as even extra points would be challenging. I'm not sure I want to see things change that much. I am quite content with the game as it is.