Packers Safety Darren Sharper sounds off on new pass interference rules

[dharocks]

This is from the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
http://www.startribune.com/stories/503/4942215.html

Packers: Rule emphasis frustrates Sharper Judd Zulgad, Star Tribune August 23, 2004 PACK0823 GREEN BAY, WIS. -- Darren Sharper might have been pleased with what he saw from his teammates in the Green Bay Packers' 19-14 preseason victory over New Orleans on Saturday, but the safety certainly wasn't happy about what he saw from the officials. Referee Bill Carollo and his crew gave the Packers a preview of how strictly the NFL plans to enforce pass-interference penalties this season, calling Green Bay's defensive backs for seven infractions against receivers. "If the NFL wants to see more points scored, how about you just don't play any defenses out there?" an exasperated Sharper said. "Don't put anyone on defense, just let the offenses go out and play by themselves. Because that's what they're trying to do." Sharper was especially upset about two third-quarter pass interference calls against Joey Thomas and another on Ahmad Carroll. The rookie cornerbacks were penalized on back-to-back plays leading to the Saints' first touchdown. Sharper said none of the flags would have been thrown last year, before the NFL's competition committee told officials to start calling any contact by defensive backs after the first 5 yards. He also felt even if a respected veteran, such as holdout Mike McKenzie, had been playing the corner, that the penalties would have been assessed. "I don't care if Deion Sanders is coming back out of retirement, he's going to get called for those, because that's what they're trying to do now," Sharper said. "They're trying to make it an offense game." Right corner Al Harris, who was called for holding in the first quarter, wasn't as upset, saying the flags might have been a bit of preseason excess. "I think they went a little overboard," Harris said. "But the rules are the rules. Everybody has to abide by them so we just have to modify to accommodate the rules." The timing of the NFL's decision, however, could not be worse for the Packers and new defensive coordinator Bob Slowik. Slowik wants to play a more aggressive style, and employed certain elements of this against New Orleans. For the most part it was a success, except for the penalties. "I think our coaching staff has the mentality that we're going to still be aggressive against the receivers," Sharper said. "And if they're going to continue to [call] 5- and 15-yard penalties all the way down the field, then so be it. ... We're not going to back off or change our style of play because they're making these little tic-tac calls against us. One thing you do to try to negate that is really get aggressive with them inside of 5 yards and not let a receiver get to his route. Then sack the quarterback so he doesn't have time to throw the ball." Sharper realizes that's easy to say, but tough to execute. He also knows that offenses likely will just start to take their chances when they get in trouble. "If they're struggling, [they will] just throw the ball up deep down the field and hope they get a pass interference call," he said. "That's going to be the game plan right now. Tell the receiver to run into the defensive back when the ball is in the air and get a flag. And what kind of game is that going to be?" Judd Zulgad is at jzulgad@startribune.com

Now I completely agree with what Sharper says; the Refs will never call receivers for pushing off from the DB in order to catch a pass, so why penalize a corner for trying to bumb a WR from his route? I don't see why a rule change was even necessary in the first place.

What do you guys think?

[Dennis2112]

I think they need to call the game better NOT change the rules.

I understand the "no touch" rule and I think it is good if the refs learn to be more subjective about it.

What if the receiver runs into a stationary defender? Is that illegal contact? I know watching the Texans game sat night they called 2 or 3 penalties on the Texans when the receiver ran right into the defender.

The refs need to call the game like they see it and use their better judgement and stop running around like a bunch of scared chickens waiting for the instant replay god to overrule them.

[RC Cola]

I agree with him for the most part. I remember reading shortly after the Broncos-Redskins game a quote from Bill Parcells. I can't remember it exactly, but he was worried about how they would call it. He was ok with the rule, but only if they called it on contact that really affects a play. He was worried that they would get flag-happy and I think that game had a lot of penalties, so he had good reason to be.

I haven't seen too much of it, but mostly because I only have really watched 1 game and I also wasn't paying much attention to this rule. I seem to remember a few 5yd penalties but I can't remember if they were legit or not. It look like the Dallas DBs were either just getting in good position to avoid contact yet deflect passes or they would just get burned for long receptions. Plus, I was watching a Raider broadcast, where they all thought a challenge should have gone one way when my dad, the referee, and I all thought otherwise.

Hopefully, the refs work it out and only call it when it matters. If a WR just runs into a defender, not putting much of an effort into actually catching the ball. BTW, they also are calling illegal formation or something like that more, right? I've seen a lot of those.

[Baqui99]

The new PI calls are total chicken*****. Football is a contact sport. It's one thing to knock a receiver off a route, and another thing to make some incidental contact, which is what happens on most routes.

This new rule basically penalizes aggressive DBs and almost completely does away with bump and run coverage.

[Summer Song Giver]

Hey Paul Tagliubeeineji, I wasn't aware it was broke

[leroy]

Some of the calls have been horrible to this point. I think they are trying to make their case by calling ones that might not otherwise be called in the regular season. There was one on Demarcus Faggins on Sat that was simply pathetic. He barely grazed the wr's jersey as he ran by unavaded. It was a 3rd down that the Texans stopped and would have gotten the ball back if it werent' for that call. Make it in the regular season like that and that ref doesn't make it out of the stadium alive.

We simply have to wait until then to see what the real call will be like. I agree with Baqui99, it's a contact sport. Don't penalize people for contact that has no bearing on the play.

[gunn]

Originally posted by dharocks I don't see why a rule change was even necessary in the first place.

They didn't change any rules; there's always been the "chuck zone" rule, the refs just didn't really enforce it. The reason they are enforcing it is because the secondary is getting carried away with it. They are completely knocking the recievers off their routes; recievers have to have rights as well. Eventually, the rule, if enforced will put emphasis on the defensive backs to rely more on technique than they do currently.

I'm not opposed to the enforcing of the rule, because it works both ways. What I'd be more worried about is the pace of the game if the penalties persist.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by Baqui99 The new PI calls are total chicken*****. Football is a contact sport. It's one thing to knock a receiver off a route, and another thing to make some incidental contact, which is what happens on most routes. This new rule basically penalizes aggressive DBs and almost completely does away with bump and run coverage.

agreed...i think we're going to see penalties literally changing the game this season. have a quick, breakaway receiver on your team??? he's freaking unstoppable now. and by the way...if he can push off, look out. they won't be calling that.

if i were a receivers coach i would be begging my receivers to initiate contact.

[kevwun]

You can blame Bill Belichik for this.

[moestavern19]

Horse**** rule, I guarantee it will be gone by next season at the latest.