dixieflatline
09-26-2005, 11:04 AM
I was watching this weekends football games with a couple of friends who don't watch a lot of football. After a few holding penalties I was talking about how I hate it when my team's lineman hold on running plays but I don't mind it on passing plays. The reason for this is pretty obvious, if the lineman doesn't hold on the run you are probably only going to lose a yard or two at most, if you don't hold on the pass and the QB goes down you are losing more yardage with an increased chance of fumbling and injury to your QB who isn't as prepared for the hit. Even better you get the down over again so instead of looking at something like 2nd and 17 from the sack you are looking at 1st and 20(or even better if the refs don't call it) which is much more makeable. There just isn't enough of a penalty for holding on pass plays in the league.
After thinking this through some more the more I think holding should be a spot of the foul penalty all the time. If you hold on a pass play and are 4 yards behind the line it should be a 10 yard penalty from that spot(14 yards total). This would make the penalty more reasonable IMO and not reward lineman for latching on when they are beat. Holding is a spot foul if you hold in the endzone and on returns so why is it not a spot foul if you hold behind the line of scrimmage?
Thoughts? Good idea? Bad idea?
After thinking this through some more the more I think holding should be a spot of the foul penalty all the time. If you hold on a pass play and are 4 yards behind the line it should be a 10 yard penalty from that spot(14 yards total). This would make the penalty more reasonable IMO and not reward lineman for latching on when they are beat. Holding is a spot foul if you hold in the endzone and on returns so why is it not a spot foul if you hold behind the line of scrimmage?
Thoughts? Good idea? Bad idea?