Rule changes that would benefit the NFL most

The week-by-week progress of the NFL can feel like a whack-a-mole game in which each of the issues plaguing the sport presents itself. Sometimes it’s injuries, sometimes it’s the league running up against a larger culture war being waged, and sometimes it’s inconsistent or incoherent disciplinary action. In Week 15, it was the NFL’s host of complex and untenable rules.

Two games with a national audience were decided by controversial rules at the goal line. Naturally, the more consequential of the two revolved around the NFL’s seemingly eternal problem of figuring out what is and isn’t a catch. Even before this past week, it was clear the NFL needed to streamline or at least clarify many of its rules. In fact, one of the fundamental criticisms of the game is that there are far too many rules, and they get in the way of the athleticism of the game.

Here are suggestions for rule changes that could improve matters for next season and beyond.

Relax holding calls 

According to conventional wisdom, it’s possible to call holding on every play in professional football. In the strictest sense, that’s probably true, which makes it all the more frustrating when it isn’t called consistently in games.

What’s more, holding calls wipe out more exciting offensive plays than any other penalty in the sport. Given that offensive line play is generally on the decline with the reduced amount of practice time accorded to teams in the offseason, this seems like an easy tweak to offset that — plus it would indirectly afford more protection to quarterbacks since rushers would have a harder time reaching them. With the crushing amount of starting QBs that went down this season, that’s bound to be appealing to the NFL.

Getting rid of holding altogether isn’t realistic or even ideal, but the league would be well-advised to loosen the guidelines on what constitutes holding.

Make defensive pass interference a tiered penalty 

If you’re going to relax holding penalties, you have to give a concession to defenses unless you want every game to end in a 55-52 score. While some might like that sort of inundation of offense, there are still plenty of people who enjoy quality defensive play. Besides, how are you ever going to convince the next generation of football players to sign up to play defense when their job would consist of getting torched all game? Things are going to favor the offense because that’s what draws in casual fans. Some semblance of balance needs to be struck, though.

Anyway, pass interference as an automatic spot foul has always created too much incentive for teams to chuck it deep and hope to be rewarded by hand fighting between the receiver and defender — looking at you, Joe Flacco. In this case, the NFL should take an idea from college and make pass interference a spot foul within 15 yards and a baseline 15-yard penalty beyond that. The one tweak I would suggest is that egregious and obvious interference fouls beyond 15 yards would qualify for a 30-yard penalty. That way you wouldn’t have defensive backs automatically fouling if they’re beaten badly on a deep route. Essentially, this would work how face mask penalties used to in the NFL.

Eliminate turnovers for fumbling through the opponent’s end zone 

A divisive rule among hardcore football fans, there’s a reasonable argument to support the current standard that an offensive player fumbling through the opponent’s end zone results in a turnover and a touchback. Those against it note any other fumble out of bounds results in the offensive team retaining the ball. Those for it note that the end zone is far more important and different than any other part of the field.

Ultimately, offense wins out. A workable compromise would be for a fumble through the end zone to result in loss of down and the ball being moved back to the 20. It isn’t going to satisfy everyone, but it will result in less anti-climatic ends to drives. An offensive team fumbling through its own end zone would still result in a safety.

Simplify the catch rule 

There’s no solution that will eliminate at least some form of controversy. Any change that results in more completions, however, is a positive. Completion percentage is at an all-time high in the league, though that has more to do with offenses based on quick, short passes and screens. Making the criteria for a catch two feet down and control of the ball is perhaps a little too simplistic, since it would render any ball immediately knocked loose by defender a fumble. The NFL got rid of the vague “football act” standard before settling on the current definition, the just as vague requirements to “become a runner” and “survive the ground.”

The league doesn’t need to return to the old terminology, exactly, but it would be best to define a catch as two feet down, control of the ball, plus another action within a second of securing it, such as a change of direction, two steps, etc. Beyond a second of controlling the ball, it should be considered a reception even if the receiver remained static.

Institute targeting 

This one is already more or less guaranteed to happen, warts and all. Ejections have gone up in recent years, in part because of the NFL codifying the rule in which a player with two personal fouls is removed from the game. This would be a further escalation. And that’s fine, IF done fairly. Which leads to an important stipulation...

Remove defenseless receiver protection for ducking the head 

Between ticky-tack pass interference penalties and defenseless receiver protection, the league has made the job of cornerback exceedingly difficult in the modern era. Even former veteran NFL receivers are starting to sympathize with them.