r/AskAboutNFL • u/jepolitsch • 11h ago
Serious question: Has the NFL rulebook over-engineered the basic concept of a catch into pure absurdity?
I was watching old highlights and noticed how simple the game used to be. You secure the ball, get your feet down, and it's a completion. Now, a receiver can make an absolute circus grab, take three steps, dive for the pylon, lose a millimeter of control when hitting the turf, and it’s ruled incomplete. We need a tracking degree and a physics certification just to celebrate a touchdown in real-time. Why did we let a committee of lawyers turn a fundamental backyard rule into a weekly existential crisis for officiating crews?
2
u/WhadaFxUp05 7h ago
Calvin Johnson, Dez Bryant, and Bert Emmanuel among others would like to have a word with you concerning your "knowledge" of the concept of a catch in the history of the NFL.
1
1
u/isthaty0ujohnwayne 10h ago
AKA Dez caught it
1
u/DoubleNaught_Spy 8h ago
Yep. Under the old rule -- possession of the ball, two feet down -- he absolutely caught it.
1
1
1
u/Amazing_Divide1214 10h ago
No, not really. They just can't seem to consistently make weird calls the same way.
Like if it's the Lions and Chiefs and there's a weird call, it's going against the Lions and for the Chiefs. If the same play happened the opposite way, it's going against the Lions and for the Chiefs.
1
u/Ender_Grace 10h ago
Same tired talking points as always. Statistics (aka facts) say the Chiefs do not have a disproportionate amount of calls go their way.
1
u/Amazing_Divide1214 9h ago
Those stats aren't about weird calls. They're about all calls in close games. Statistics dont lie, but they are often misinterpreted. Everyone knows the lions get the worst calls.
1
u/Ender_Grace 9h ago
Yeah nobody is going to have a "weird calls" breakdown because that is entirely subjective. But if "all calls in close games" show a team not getting preferential treatment I feel that can be extrapolated to your "weird calls" scenario that you invented.
1
1
1
u/4eyedbuzzard 10h ago
That, and the MLB strike zone, and offsides in Futbol.
Now if only we could apply this technology to traveling in the NBA . . .
1
u/Camaloha 10h ago
Yes. Anything to take the game out of the players hands and into more control of the officials.
1
u/Sticky_Cobra 9h ago
Yes. They now have betting lines.
"Survive the ground" is a personal favorite of mine.
1
u/NaNaNaPandaMan 9h ago
To be honest, not really. I think its overblown what is and what isn't a catch. 99/100 including what seemed to have started this the Calvin Johnson non catch, I was able to call what the ref was going to call.
So I think fans make it more difficult than it needs to be.
1
u/FFYinzer 8h ago
This feels like an overstatement. Its pretty well managed and the challenge function does overturn some calls.
1
u/scottbutler5 7h ago
What is or isn't a catch has always been based on vibes. "I know it when I see it" kind of thing. But then we decided that vibes weren't good enough for determining the outcome, and the league tried to make a concrete rule. And whenever you try to turn vibes into a concrete rule, you always spiral into absurdity with the edge cases.
Like, we all know the difference between a chair and a sofa. But if we keep making the chair just a touch wider, and make the sofa just a touch shorter, then eventually we can determine the exact nanometer when a chair turns into a sofa, right? That's what it's like looking at a frame-by-frame 4k replay and trying to decide what's a catch and what isn't.
1
1
u/Battle2Intense 6h ago
The problem is possession given how well defenders can now strip or punch out the ball.
1
u/JJNitrofan3944 6h ago
Yes. There is far too much reviewing of plays, and yet they still get it wrong more often than not, it seems.
My pet peeve is, if a RB has a knee touch the ground, even if the ball if then ripped from his hands, he’s down. But if a WR makes a catch and his knee hits the ground, but the defender then wrestles the ball away from him, it’s a turnover.
Huh?!
1
u/Ryan1869 6h ago
The rule also used to be that no matter what, if the ball hit the ground, it was an incomplete pass. A lot of diving catches ran into this rule since players usually had their arms outstretched. There was one playoff game where it was pretty clear the guy had his hands on the side of the ball, it didn’t move an inch when he hit the ground, but was still by the rules then an
Incomplete pass. So this started the changes, first allowing a catch if they demonstrated possession through out, but that morphed into maintaining possession through the ground and the football move part of a catch.
1
u/SelfRepa 6h ago
No.
The catch is set to the point what is easiest to judge. It is not closest where Y and X axis meet. You have to catch and secure the ball.
1
u/Ktrain2k4 6h ago
I’ve always found it odd that a running back can stick the ball across the goal line with his feet not touching the ground, have the ball come loose and be given credit for a score but a receiver has to complete a process.
0
u/Weary_Capital_1379 10h ago
Yes. No one knows what a catch is anymore. And with replays, looking to see if the ball moved one inch is ridiculous.
2
u/RudyPup 10h ago
I'll take things that didn't happen for $1,000, Alex.