Let's Sack the New Sack Rule

Now that the NFL has established what a catch is, the new most confusing play in football is the sack.  Not the sack itself.  It's pretty obvious when one of those occurs.  No, it's whether or not a sack carries a 15-yard personal foul penalty with it.

One of the NFL's points of emphasis for officials this season is roughing the passer penalties.  Specifically, they don't want defenders to land with their weight on the quarterback.  Which is easier said than done.

That part of the rule has actually been in place since 1995, but it only became a point of emphasis after Aaron Rodgers broke his collarbone when Vikings linebacker Anthony Barr fell on him last season.  And that point of emphasis has definitely been emphasized.  Thru Week 3, they've called 34 roughing the passer penalties.  That's more than 11 a week!  There were a total of 109 such calls all of last season, an average of 6.4 per week.  So, because of the new emphasis, roughing the passer penalties have nearly doubled.

This prevalence of roughing the passer calls has rubbed a lot of people the wrong way.  Jerry Jones isn't a fan.  He used some sort of boxing analogy while referring to it in his weekly appearance on a Dallas radio show.  Jones isn't on the competition committee, but they're not happy either.  The competition committee will discuss it on a conference call next week, but they aren't sure anything will happen during the season.  Although, they did start officiating plays differently after the first two preseason games, so you never know.

The problem isn't so much the rule itself.  It's the ambiguity in the interpretation.  Plays that were legal last year (and all other previous seasons) are now suddenly a 15-yard penalty.  It's very difficult for defenders to figure out how to make the tackle (the way they've always made it!) without getting called for a penalty.  And how much body weight constitutes "too much"?

For example, Clay Matthews has gotten flagged for roughing the passer in each of the Packers' first three games.  The first one against the Bears was a clear roughing the passer.  But he's gotten flagged for two that are highly questionable in the last two weeks.  In the tie game against Minnesota, he was called for roughing the passer on a play where he wrapped Kirk Cousins around the midsection before driving him to the ground and landing next to him.  That controversial call negated a Packers interception.

While the league defended its ruling on that play and even included it in the teaching video for the following week, I have no idea how Matthews' sack of Alex Smith on Sunday constitutes a penalty.  To me, this is just a good football play.  I've watched it at least 10 times and I still have no idea how this is a penalty.  Yet, according to the officials, it's 15 yards for roughing the passer.

Obviously the NFL defended the call there, too, but Matthews didn't mix words when he was asked about it, saying the league is "getting soft."  He said to the Green Bay Press Gazette, "Unfortunately this league's going in a direction I think a lot of people don't like.  The only thing hard about this league is the fines they levy down on guys like me who play the game hard."

Referee Craig Wrolstad, who threw the flag, told reporters after the Redskins game that he thought Matthews could've done more to avoid the penalty, but he disagrees.  In that same Green Bay Press Gazette interview, Matthews said, "Obviously when you're tackling a guy from the front, you're gonna land on him.  I understand the spirit of the rule, I said that weeks prior.  But when you have a hit like that, that's a football play."  I 100 percent agree.

Worse, players have gotten injured trying to avoid the penalty on a sack.  Dolphins defensive end William Hayes tore his ACL when his foot got caught underneath him as he tried to roll off Raiders quarterback Derek Carr on Sunday.  Obviously, he's out for the season, which Miami Head Coach Adam Gase confirmed on Monday.

To put it more succinctly, I turn to ESPN's Trey Wingo and 49ers cornerback Richard Sherman.  Wingo: "So in attempt to keep a QB safe...a DL's season is over."  Sherman, who has never been shy when it comes to criticizing the league, in response: "They don't care about the rest of us getting hurt.  Long as the QB is safe."

Unfortunately, I think Sherman's right.  Quarterback is obviously the marquee position in football.  But what happens if it's not a no-name Dolphins defensive end that gets hurt and it's J.J. Watt or Khalil Mack or Aaron Donald or even Clay Matthews instead?

Most of the NFL's rule changes regarding player safety are designed to protect offensive players.  Helmet-to-helmet hits on a "defenseless receiver" were a big thing for a long time.  They've fortunately modified that rule a little bit so that offensive players can't lead with the helmet anymore.  But the point remains, all of these plays result in a penalty for the defense, but who's out there protecting the defensive players from getting hurt?

And, frankly, was the old rule really that bad?  Yes, it sucked that Aaron Rodgers got hurt on a sack last season.  But that play was a penalty then, and it still would be now.  It seems like there was very little reason to overreact and change the interpretation.  Especially since it's resulting in an abundance of penalties.  And I'm sure Hayes' injury won't be the last, either.  Neither of which is something anybody wanted.