Some Facts about penalties, the Cowboys, and their opponents

[Brooksey]

Again, if you can't understand the fundamental difference between the unsubstantiated strident claims being made and an actual question, then I can't help you.

Your reasons for separating the actions/complaints are combative. It solves nothing and adds nothing to the conversation.
People are making these allegations because because Holding, PI is "Subjective" and not reviewable, yet there's millions of dollars on the games. 300M per week.

There's going to be conspiracy, don't blame them. Why are you so angry at the people who feel cheated? You're going to tell them how they should feel or think?

Blame the process Cal

 

[Brooksey]

I just found the link in my history. There's no "bear hug" on Lawrence at all. Like literally at all. Lawrence did all the damage to himself by getting fooled. The Guard just got in his way, did a 2-handed touch thing on him and let him go where he wanted. Berrios is on Wilson and blocks him and continues engaging Wilson as Wilson slips away catching Wilson's trailing hand but doesn't pull on it and Wilson is allowed to go where he wanted to go in changing directions. Again, consult the rule: you have to "materially restrict or alter the defender’s path or angle of pursuit." If Wilson got to go where he wanted to go and wasn't materially restricted from doing so (material meaning that some is okay) then that is not a hold.

I must have been laughing so hard at the Lawrence one to not even see Wilson/Berrios but that is clearly not a hold either.

There is a bear hug that keeps D Law from the tackle and the arm/wrist hold by Berrios that prevents Wilson from making the tackle.

Either you don't know what your looking at or you're covering for the refs for some odd reason.

 

[MarcusRock]

There is a bear hug that keeps D Law from the tackle and the arm/wrist hold by Berrios that prevents Wilson from making the tackle.

Either you don't know what your looking at or you're covering for the refs for some odd reason.

Sorry, bro but you and/or the creator of this video is the one who doesn't know what they're looking at, much less the wording of the rules. Notice how I'm the only one that actually quotes them. The fact you think most of those were holds says a lot. Even in the thread everyone who looked at all of those said they weren't majority holds. So if you want to talk agenda, the mirror would be the place to start.

 

[gimmesix]

Again, you're not looking at the Guard's hand action. He raises that arm you speak of in a "push" fashion that you're saying somehow turned into a hook when a DL who got fooled has to loop around to the ball carrier. That IS Lawrence's fault. The OL isn't penalized for the DL's bad decision-making and thus positioning. Positioning is part of the reason the rip technique holding exception exists in the rules I gather. But to continue with this hooking theory, if the Guard successfully hooks Lawrence, how is Lawrence able to still get that hooked arm on the ball carrier and partially trip him? Not a very effective hook I'd say. That's because the before and after show it wasn't. A hook turns a defender from where he wants to go because that's the wording of the rule that overarches everything. Lawrence was wanting to, and got to the ball carrier to actually trip him up, even after being wrong-footed. So again, we go to the rules: was Lawrence "materially restricted" or had his "path or angle of pursuit" altered or did he get to where he wanted to go when changing directions, all the way to contacting the ball carrier in this case? You cannot get around that rule.

Lawrence went around the guard and the guard used his right arm to hook block him. He didn't grab and hold him so Lawrence fought through the hook. You act like just because a lineman gets his arm around a defender that the defender is unable to make a play. I've said before that I do not think this play should have been called holding. If there was clear evidence of a grab, then that would be different. The league is not calling as many hooks as holds as it used to.

 

[gimmesix]

No, I'd like the still shot. I've watched the video repeatedly, including just now. What you say is there, is not even close to being there. And Berrios was wearing an off-white glove so it contrasts to the Cowboys white uniforms so there's nothing to confuse.

If I had the still shot, I'd be glad to provide it. As you said the color of the glove makes it easy to see and keeps there from being any confusion that that thing on Wilson's inside shoulder is Berrios' hand.

 

[Brooksey]

Sorry, bro but you and/or the creator of this video is the one who doesn't know what they're looking at, much less the wording of the rules. Notice how I'm the only one that actually quotes them. The fact you think most of those were holds says a lot. Even in the thread everyone, who looked at all of those said they weren't majority holds. So if you want to talk agenda, the mirror would be the place to start.

Most agreed they were holds and 5-6 should have been called. You can low ball it at three, that's fine. I think its worth the discussion, I made the video to put out the facts and have a discussion.

I appreciate your input, we can disagree on a few holds. Like the one with Mazi, that was ticky tack but he was stunting and the D lineman did twist his shoulder pads away from his intended path.
I don't think he gets there so i'm not calling that. The one on Micah up the middle, I don't think he gets there. I don't call those if it's me, doesn't mean they weren't holding. The first one on Micah was a double arm bar.
If he splits a double team you can't stick your arm out to stop him with an arm bar, bot OL did it and or Tua would have sacked, that's a hold. The one against Gholston, hold, the two against Wilson and Damone? holds.

At most I don't like the point of attack holds on our LB/Safeties on the run plays. you can't steer the shoulder pad away from the hole with your arms or hands, you gotta get your hips around.
That's holding at the POA, should be called 100% of the time and should not be subjective imo.

 

[gimmesix]

Sorry, bro but you and/or the creator of this video is the one who doesn't know what they're looking at, much less the wording of the rules. Notice how I'm the only one that actually quotes them. The fact you think most of those were holds says a lot. Even in the thread everyone who looked at all of those said they weren't majority holds. So if you want to talk agenda, the mirror would be the place to start.

You do seem to have this overbearing need to defend the refs, though, to the extent that you take plays that could be a penalty and say that they are not or dismiss plays that were called a penalty but were not, such as the holding call against Lamb against Washington. I'm not sure why that brings you great satisfaction, but it's really annoying. Nothing wrong with pointing out clear non-penalties but you go out of your way to paint yourself as some kind of rules expert. No one asked for or needs that.

I dissected the plays that were given in the video, gave my reasons for believing some were holds and some were not (which ended up not being that much different than yours). But I don't see the need to rub upset fans' faces in it.

 

[blueblood70]

enjoy lol nothing to see here at all I mean these must all be subjective 4-5 games in a row no holding calls hmm

 

[plasticman]

There’s been a lot of talk this week about NFL officiating, questions about the NFL rigging games against the Cowboys, etc. I’m on record as someone who believes NFL officiating is certainly bad at times but I do not believe there is some evil conspiracy against the Cowboys. Have the officials missed too many holding calls against Micah Parsons? Yes, for sure. Are they “out to get us”? No.

Here are just the basic facts regarding penalties and the Cowboys.

• The Cowboys have been flagged 108 times for 910 yards. (2nd most in the NFL)
• Cowboys’ opponents have been flagged 94 times for 860 yards. (5th most yards for an opponent in the NFL)
• The difference between Cowboys and their opponents is 12 penalties over 15 games. .Cowboys avg 1.25 more penalties per game than their opponents
• The difference in penalty yardage of Cowboys vs our opponents is 50 yards. Over 15 games, that averages 3.33 yards per game difference in penalty yardage between Cowboys and opponents.

Website that contains great info on NFL penalties in 2023: https://www.nflpenalties.com/

I didn't get a chance to read this thread before I responded to a different one with this same exact answer.

The largest difference in penalties between a team and their opponents belong to the Jets with an average of 2.1 penalties per game more than their opponents for an average of 12.2 yards in penalties per game.

The greatest advantage belongs to the Vikings with an average of 1.9 penalties less per game for 19.9 less yards per game than their opponents.

Therefore, the difference in penalties for all teams and their opponents in the NFL is between a range of 2.1 more to 1.9 less. The best team is penalized 4 times less than the worse team per game compared to their opponents.

 

[gimmesix]

I didn't get a chance to read this thread before I responded to a different one with this same exact answer.

The largest difference in penalties between a team and their opponents belong to the Jets with an average of 2.1 penalties per game more than their opponents for an average of 12.2 yards in penalties per game.

The greatest advantage belongs to the Vikings with an average of 1.9 penalties less per game for 19.9 less yards per game than their opponents.

Therefore, the difference in penalties for all teams and their opponents in the NFL is between a range of 2.1 more to 1.9 less. The best team is penalized 4 times less than the worse team per game compared to their opponents.

It only takes one bad call to make the difference in winning or losing when good teams face each other. I go back to the first Philly game and the bad spot on the Eagles' opening drive, which gave them fourth-and-1 instead of fourth-and-2 deep in their territory. With their tush push, it's no surprise that they went for it and got it with only one yard to go. If it had been two, it would have been no surprise if they punted since it was fairly good into their territory. In a five-point game, take away a TD drive and maybe there's a different outcome. If the officials had spotted the ball right, who knows what would have happened?

Some have the wrongheaded attitude that a team is just supposed to be good enough to overcome the officiating, but when you are evenly matched with an opponent, it doesn't take much to make a difference. Would a hold called against Miami have made a difference in a two-point game, or roughing the passer not being called, or defensive holding being called when a defensive back was clearly tugging on Lamb's pants?

 

[RonnieT24]

It only takes one bad call to make the difference in winning or losing when good teams face each other. I go back to the first Philly game and the bad spot on the Eagles' opening drive, which gave them fourth-and-1 instead of fourth-and-2 deep in their territory. With their tush push, it's no surprise that they went for it and got it with only one yard to go. If it had been two, it would have been no surprise if they punted since it was fairly good into their territory. In a five-point game, take away a TD drive and maybe there's a different outcome. If the officials had spotted the ball right, who knows what would have happened?

Some have the wrongheaded attitude that a team is just supposed to be good enough to overcome the officiating, but when you are evenly matched with an opponent, it doesn't take much to make a difference. Would a hold called against Miami have made a difference in a two-point game, or roughing the passer not being called, or defensive holding being called when a defensive back was clearly tugging on Lamb's pants?

Exactly.. The "but it all evens out" narrative is horse pucky. The fact of the matter is it simply does not. People wanting to look at the raw numbers and declare that they are "close" ignore the simple reality that at several positions we have guys who would win 90% of their snaps if the other teams were not allowed to cheat. Parsons is one.. Tank is one.. Tyron is one.. Zack is one.. CeeDee is one. These are guy who will pretty much always win in a fair fight against 90% of the guys they face. So pointing out that the overall team numbers are "pretty close" is woefully insufficient. They are being handicapped for being too good.. Well except for Zack.. For whatever reason they don't wanna call penalties on him. Reputation can be a valuable thing. A very valuable thing.. That at he plays inside where quite simply it's harder to see him if he does hold. Not saying he does a lot.. but nobody will ever convince me that Zack Martin only holds like once every 20-25 games. That's not really possibly in modern football. But good for him that he gets that treatment. He's pretty much the only member of this franchise to get that treatment in the last 30 years.

 

[starfrombirth]

Bob, I think you are confusing the number of penalties versus the timing of the penalties.

An official could throw or not throw a flag on a single play that changes the outcome of a game.

Beyond that, penalties hurt teams the most on third downs (on either side), so that would be a good starting point.

Also... it is the blatant non-calls that allow opponents to convert and continue the drive to score when Micah should have gotten a sack. I watched Micah have his jersey neck literally pulled down to his stomach while he was about to tackle the ball carrier and it wasn't called. How many pics are coming to light where Micah is literally in a choke hold (sometimes by 2 opponents). Meanwhile in the same game Tyler is called for holding when his hands are inside the shoulder pads. It is super frustratin.

 

[gimmesix]

Exactly.. The "but it all evens out" narrative is horse pucky. The fact of the matter is it simply does not. People wanting to look at the raw numbers and declare that they are "close" ignore the simple reality that at several positions we have guys who would win 90% of their snaps if the other teams were not allowed to cheat. Parsons is one.. Tank is one.. Tyron is one.. Zack is one.. CeeDee is one. These are guy who will pretty much always win in a fair fight against 90% of the guys they face. So pointing out that the overall team numbers are "pretty close" is woefully insufficient. They are being handicapped for being too good.. Well except for Zack.. For whatever reason they don't wanna call penalties on him. Reputation can be a valuable thing. A very valuable thing.. That at he plays inside where quite simply it's harder to see him if he does hold. Not saying he does a lot.. but nobody will ever convince me that Zack Martin only holds like once every 20-25 games. That's not really possibly in modern football. But good for him that he gets that treatment. He's pretty much the only member of this franchise to get that treatment in the last 30 years.

Well, part of being good at what you do is knowing how to do it. There are ways to "legally" hold. it's only when Martin allows a defender to get away from his body and pull that he gets called for it. And he doesn't allow that very often, which is why his numbers are so low. I don't think we should assume that he's getting special treatment. It's just like Tyron. They are usually able to wedge their guy, essentially grabbing them on the sides of the chest and under the armpits and not letting them get out of the wedge, so it's hard to tell if they are gripping them or just pinning them. In fact, there have been times when I felt Tyron was wrongly called for a hold because he pinned a DE and then slammed him to the ground. The refs assume when a player gets taken to the ground that he had to have been held, but Tyron didn't ... he just used those hammerlocks of his to lock up the defender and cave him.

 

[MarcusRock]

Lawrence went around the guard and the guard used his right arm to hook block him. He didn't grab and hold him so Lawrence fought through the hook. You act like just because a lineman gets his arm around a defender that the defender is unable to make a play. I've said before that I do not think this play should have been called holding. If there was clear evidence of a grab, then that would be different. The league is not calling as many hooks as holds as it used to.

Yeah, no hook took place that anyone can see here. Lawrence made things harder for himself, thus needing to loop around at a sharper angle than if he'd not been fooled. And he still got the "hooked" hand on the runner. If that ain't a sign of not being restricted, I don't know what is. In the position the OL was in if he wanted to hook Lawrence, there's no way Lawrence "fights through" with the disadvantaged position he's in. The Guard clearly makes a pushing motion, gets in the way and then lets Lawrence through so he doesn't foul him. This one was clearly not a hold and was the most laughable one to be pointed out as such among those 10.

 

[MarcusRock]

If I had the still shot, I'd be glad to provide it. As you said the color of the glove makes it easy to see and keeps there from being any confusion that that thing on Wilson's inside shoulder is Berrios' hand.

Would love to see it because Berrios doesn't even glance Wilson's shoulder with his hands. They are never even in the area. Wilson threw his shoulder into Berrios' chest and that's as close as Berrios got to any shoulder.

 

[MarcusRock]

Most agreed they were holds and 5-6 should have been called. You can low ball it at three, that's fine. I think its worth the discussion, I made the video to put out the facts and have a discussion.

I appreciate your input, we can disagree on a few holds. Like the one with Mazi, that was ticky tack but he was stunting and the D lineman did twist his shoulder pads away from his intended path.
I don't think he gets there so i'm not calling that. The one on Micah up the middle, I don't think he gets there. I don't call those if it's me, doesn't mean they weren't holding. The first one on Micah was a double arm bar.
If he splits a double team you can't stick your arm out to stop him with an arm bar, bot OL did it and or Tua would have sacked, that's a hold. The one against Gholston, hold, the two against Wilson and Damone? holds.

At most I don't like the point of attack holds on our LB/Safeties on the run plays. you can't steer the shoulder pad away from the hole with your arms or hands, you gotta get your hips around.
That's holding at the POA, should be called 100% of the time and should not be subjective imo.

All good. No two people are going to agree on everything. Appreciate you putting the video together and hope you'll make more. It's far superior to just saying "we wuz robbed" with nothing behind it.

 

[MarcusRock]

You do seem to have this overbearing need to defend the refs, though, to the extent that you take plays that could be a penalty and say that they are not or dismiss plays that were called a penalty but were not, such as the holding call against Lamb against Washington. I'm not sure why that brings you great satisfaction, but it's really annoying. Nothing wrong with pointing out clear non-penalties but you go out of your way to paint yourself as some kind of rules expert. No one asked for or needs that.

I dissected the plays that were given in the video, gave my reasons for believing some were holds and some were not (which ended up not being that much different than yours). But I don't see the need to rub upset fans' faces in it.

Yeah, not getting where the tone is coming from out of you. When one presents something for critique it tends to get critiqued. Not sure if you thought the quoted post was for you but it's hard to miss that it wasn't and I was responding to someone else. But if I get snark in replies to me explaining my opinions then I return it.

And what I do here is not something I wait around to see if someone asks for it. I write what I write, think I substantiate it well, and if it's the truth, it'll be that. People can disagree. But I care not if people are offended by it, it bothers them, or if the whole board wants to ostracize me. This online space is entertainment. I don't start none but if others want to I can speak that language too and give it twice as good as I get it if I'm bothered to do so. So if how I operate here is "annoying" then again I guess it'll be that ... to you. Won't change what I do in the slightest.

 

[Bobhaze]

Let’s keep it civil in here my friends. We can disagree without acting like Philly fans, lol.

 

[Beast_from_East]

It is not so much the number for or against or the yards.
It is the timing of many of them. And not just the Dallas games. As well the missed or non calls.
Seen it all too often in many other games.

Look how many games favored the Eagles to win on a controversial call at the end of the game.
5 wins, with calls or non calls that favored their way.

No, not saying it is rigged or a conspiracy. But it is very strange. So it makes you question it.

Considering usually half of our penalties are pre snap (false starts, illegal shifts, illegal formations, ect...)

I find the conspiracy theory of rigged games hard to belive, unless you belive our own players are in on the conspiracy

 

[Blast From The Past]

Bob, I think you are confusing the number of penalties versus the timing of the penalties.

An official could throw or not throw a flag on a single play that changes the outcome of a game.

Beyond that, penalties hurt teams the most on third downs (on either side), so that would be a good starting point.

I've resigned myself to look at the tv screen intently after any good yardage play or td on offense or special team kick offs/punts that get big chunks. Delayed flags are worse in my opinion as it delays me knowing it is probably coming back, can't celebrate prematurely. Been watching college bowl games and the college boys know how to block correctly, defend correctly and they get to the nfl and get amnesia. Because the college games are a joy to watch right now and is night and day to the pro game on being fluid, exciting and competitiveness.