Football's Worst Rule

I will have to be hasty here.  My last post on the great College Football Playoff was co-opted by a Grantland article that made the same conclusion while, predictably, putting my writing and thinking to shame.  That’s okay, they get paid to do it, but I won’t dally further on a topic that has large significance.

The “process rule” is the worst rule in organized football.  Many will not understand what I mean by that, but the rule (in the NFL, although college football has a similar rule) states that “if a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a ball, he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.”  In essence, hitting the ground can cause you to lose possession if you’re catching a ball, unless you maintain control all the way through hitting the ground, assumedly sliding a bit, and coming to a full stop.

I don’t like the idea that the ground can cause a player to lose possession, mainly because that rule is invalidated when a player goes to ground after contact.  Think on NFL plays, and we all know points when the ball pops out after a knee or elbow is down, and the refs blow the play dead.  Happens with enough regularity where I don’t need to find examples. 

But when catching a ball while going to the ground, whether your knee or elbow are down prior to losing the ball does not matter.  Contact with the ground that causes a ball to pop out results in an incomplete pass, regardless of whether your knee, elbow, wrist, shoulder, butt, or head hit the ground prior to contact with the ground.  It’s an inconsistent view of the ground’s ability to affect possession.  Running backs need not control the ball through the process of going to the ground, but receivers must.

Lest anyone think I am writing this to defend Dez Bryant or preach for a Cowboys win, my record of Dallas hatred should be decently clear.  Truthfully, I can see how some could interpret the rule above to result in an incomplete for Dez on the play.  But, I have to say that to me looks like a catch, primarily because Dez takes two steps before hitting the ground.  Are they more stumbles than steps?  Sure, but it isn’t as if he’s laying out horizontally for a ball that popped out at the very end.  But, at the very least, the eye test shows fairly clearly that he has the ball caught.  It isn’t moving in his hands or anything like that, and then he takes two steps.

The best thing about this call is the assured Cowboys loss.  After that, it’s all negative.  My interpretation is of course just one man’s opinion, but the underlying issue remains unsolved.  Can contact with the ground cause a player to lose possession or not?  Should it matter if you’re a ball carrier or a receiver, especially in cases where the receiver is shown to have possession prior to his body hitting the ground?  I don’t know the correct answer, but what’s troubling is I don’t think the NFL does either.