Former NFL head of officiating Mike Pereira comes out against new NFL player protection rules (1 Viewer)

bergeaux

Building my own team!
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
3,275
Location
Washington DC
Offline
Mike Pereira now works for Fox Sports and wrote an article saying that the new NFL rules have good intentions, but are too confusing to work as intended and need to be reviewed and revised:


http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/pereira-league-needs-to-reassess-helmet-fines-120710

(Was posted yesterday.)

Here is one reason I think the league’s approach is working: I haven’t seen much of the Meriweather-type hit since Week 6. That hit was the worst of them all.

....

I think every single player and coach in the NFL now knows that was a foul. So this part of the renewed emphasis seems to be working, which is good news.

The bad news is that the line, beyond the Meriweather hit, has become blurry when it comes to what is legal and what is not.

I really hate to admit this, but I am beginning to question this, also.

I say this because I thought the hit this past Sunday night by Ravens linebacker Jameel McClain on Steelers tight end Heath Miller was not a foul. I felt the contact that occurred was shoulder-to-helmet and unavoidable.

So, is the NFL’s approach to these excessive fines working?

I would have to say no.

I think Mike's assessment carries more weight than ANYONE else's.


(NOTE: This was posted in the Suh thread, but I feel merits it's own thread. Mike Pereira saying this publicly is HUGE news.)
 
I think Mike's assessment carries more weight than ANYONE else's.

Mike Pereira saying this publicly is HUGE news.)

I don't see it. He no longer is on the NFL payroll and is now another former employee working as a columnist or talking head who's field happens to be officiating.

It's not like the current head of officiating is coming out and questioning the NFL's policies. It carries the same weight of say a Dan Marino coming out and talking about what kind of QB Drew Brees or Tony Romo or Matt Millen/Charley Chasserly talking about personnel moves.
 
I don't see it. He no longer is on the NFL payroll and is now another former employee working as a columnist or talking head who's field happens to be officiating.

It's not like the current head of officiating is coming out and questioning the NFL's policies. It carries the same weight of say a Dan Marino coming out and talking about what kind of QB Drew Brees or Tony Romo or Matt Millen/Charley Chasserly talking about personnel moves.

OK, that's your opinion, but to me the guy who has been running all of NFL officiating and making the decision on how to apply new rules and whether officials were making the right call for nearly a decade carries serious weight on what he thinks.

Just my opinion, you have yours.
 
It's crazy how different his stance is. I remember last season when I would watch the NFL.com vids of him explaining an officials call and we would ALWAYS agree with the official.

Now, since he's not on the league's payroll, he seems to voice his opinion a little more and call out an official or the NFL when discussing a questionable call.
 
It's crazy how different his stance is. I remember last season when I would watch the NFL.com vids of him explaining an officials call and we would ALWAYS agree with the official.

Now, since he's not on the league's payroll, he seems to voice his opinion a little more and call out an official or the NFL when discussing a certain call.

I saw him disagree and say "we got it wrong" many times on NFL Total Access.
 
I don't see it. He no longer is on the NFL payroll and is now another former employee working as a columnist or talking head who's field happens to be officiating.

It's not like the current head of officiating is coming out and questioning the NFL's policies. It carries the same weight of say a Dan Marino coming out and talking about what kind of QB Drew Brees or Tony Romo or Matt Millen/Charley Chasserly talking about personnel moves.

I think it carries more weight because being the former head of officials means he is worked directly with the officials who are out there. So it's not like Dan Marino saying what kind of QB Drew is, it's like Sean Payton talking about what kind of QB Drew is.
 
I still think they have the right intentions, but aren't putting the punishment inline to alter the actions. My suggestion:

1. First offense: 10k fine..AND...the initiator is out of the current game as long as the player hit is, if a flag is thrown by the officials.

2. Second Offense: 25k fine...AND...the player is removed for the remainder of that game, if a flag is thrown by the officials.

3. Third Offense: 50k fine...AND...the player is ejected for a total of 4 quarters (60 minutes) of play from the time the hit occured. If it's the fourth quarter of a game, the the player is out for the remainder of that game and the next 3 quarters of the following game, if a flag is thrown by the officials. If a flag is not thrown by the officials for that particular hit, then the 4 quarters would start after that game has ended.

4. Fourth Offense: 75k fine...AND...the player is ejected for 8 quarters (120 min) of play), just as listed above.

All fines and any additional game time is able to be appealled, with the NFL having the final say...much like they do in substance abuse cases. These would have to be completed by no later than Tuesday morning at 8am EST, so the teams would know the status for the upcoming week.

50% of all fines for this offense will go to Charity. The other 50% will go to medical fund for retired players.

Players don't care about the fines that much. The coaches and owners don't care at ALL about the fines. You want to stop these kinds of actions, then penalize the entire team...that will get them to change the fundamentals of the game and increase safety.
 
I still think they have the right intentions, but aren't putting the punishment inline to alter the actions. My suggestion:

1. First offense: 10k fine..AND...the initiator is out of the current game as long as the player hit is, if a flag is thrown by the officials.

2. Second Offense: 25k fine...AND...the player is removed for the remainder of that game, if a flag is thrown by the officials.

3. Third Offense: 50k fine...AND...the player is ejected for a total of 4 quarters (60 minutes) of play from the time the hit occured. If it's the fourth quarter of a game, the the player is out for the remainder of that game and the next 3 quarters of the following game, if a flag is thrown by the officials. If a flag is not thrown by the officials for that particular hit, then the 4 quarters would start after that game has ended.

4. Fourth Offense: 75k fine...AND...the player is ejected for 8 quarters (120 min) of play), just as listed above.

All fines and any additional game time is able to be appealled, with the NFL having the final say...much like they do in substance abuse cases. These would have to be completed by no later than Tuesday morning at 8am EST, so the teams would know the status for the upcoming week.

50% of all fines for this offense will go to Charity. The other 50% will go to medical fund for retired players.

Players don't care about the fines that much. The coaches and owners don't care at ALL about the fines. You want to stop these kinds of actions, then penalize the entire team...that will get them to change the fundamentals of the game and increase safety.

The problem isn't the fines, it's no one understanding where the line is. It's blurry. That's what MP is saying. He said that he thought Merriweather should have been fined, and I agree with that fine. The question is whether some of the other fines were warranted. MP says the line is too blurry on whether something is a penalty and worthy of a fine.
 
It's crazy how different his stance is. I remember last season when I would watch the NFL.com vids of him explaining an officials call and we would ALWAYS agree with the official.

Uncorrect. He wasn't afraid to say when the call was wrong. He did it more than I would have expected.
 
I think it carries more weight because being the former head of officials means he is worked directly with the officials who are out there. So it's not like Dan Marino saying what kind of QB Drew is, it's like Sean Payton talking about what kind of QB Drew is.

Previously worked with the officials, so it would be more like Marty Schottenheimer talking about what kind of QB Drew is. I'm just saying while his opinion may be more informed than others talking about the topic it is still his opinion. Not the current officiating VP's opinion or even what the current officials think of the new rules and that his word isn't the end all of everything having to do with officiating in the NFL.
 
After the Suh fine I think they need to be scrapped pending further review and or ref uptraining.
 
Didn't the NFL state that shoulder-to-head hits are illegal as well? (such as Dunta Robinson to DeSean Jackson) The whole point of the stricter enforcement was to get guys to "lower the target area" ... It referred to "striking the player in the head or neck area" but mentioned that could be with the shoulder or helmet and be illegal.
 
Previously worked with the officials, so it would be more like Marty Schottenheimer talking about what kind of QB Drew is. I'm just saying while his opinion may be more informed than others talking about the topic it is still his opinion. Not the current officiating VP's opinion or even what the current officials think of the new rules and that his word isn't the end all of everything having to do with officiating in the NFL.

Here's my logic:

-Ray Anderson works for Roger Goodell. He HAS to tow the line on this one.
-Mike Pereira has about a decade of experience managing the NFL officials, creating and applying new NFL rules and is not just any yahoo giving his opinion.
-Mike Pereira is free to say what he thinks is right, now that he doesn't work for the NFL or any team.

Therefore I trust his opinion over other pundits AND over Ray Anderson's public opinion. Not saying his opinion will change the rules, but I am saying that I trust his assessment more than anyone else.

Care to counter that with some logic of why his opinion should not be taken over anyone else's?
 
Care to counter that with some logic of why his opinion should not be taken over anyone else's?

I agree with a lot of what your saying and don't even really disagree with what Mike Pereira is saying, I'm just saying that saying his is the only opinion that matters and is a huge deal is going a bit far with it. Just sayin'.
 
I agree with a lot of what your saying and don't even really disagree with what Mike Pereira is saying, I'm just saying that saying his is the only opinion that matters and is a huge deal is going a bit far with it. Just sayin'.

I understand where you're coming from. Though, I didn't say that ONLY his opinion matters.

But I disagree and do think that him disagreeing is a huge deal. My logic to me holds that his opinion is probably the most powerful and he has pretty much towed the NFL line even since he has left them. Him coming out like this, to me, is a big deal.

He didn't have to step into this brewing controversy, but I think the felt like he needed to for the betterment of the NFL. Again, my opinion.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom