Bears Blitz

Published by Timothy Hockemeyer on August 14, 2011
Article Source: Bleacher Report - Chicago Bears

Friday, the NFL reaffirmed that the decision made in the controversial Week 1 game last season between the Bears and Lions, in which an apparent last minute Calvin Johnson TD reception was ruled incomplete because he failed to maintain possession through the final action of falling.  In the 2011 Rules Changes and Points of Emphasis video, the NFL reemphasizes and clarifies the rule (starting a 8:11 of the video) and even uses the Calvin Johnson no-catch as an example.

Much was made last season about “The Catch That Wasn’t.”  Lions wide receiver Calvin Johnson appeared to make a possibly game winning touchdown catch over Bears corner Zach Bowman, only to see it discounted because the ball squirted out of his hand as his hand hit the ground while he was trying to celebrate too early.

Bears fan have had to endure being told that they actually should have lost to the Lions.  While the argument is ridiculous in that the rules were followed correctly, the accusation has stuck.

Media-types, opposing fans and even some of the Bears more pessimistic fans have continued to run with this mantra when rationalizing away the Bears success last season.  

There were many calls for a change to this rule over the past year.  Given the number of games that have been affected by this rule before, including another Lions Bears match-up on December 26, 2004 when a Chad Hutchinson-to-Bernard Berrian touchdown was called back on the same rule (skip to 1:32 of this video to see the play), why is so much attention given to this play?  

The same situation has happened plenty of times and has affected the outcome of plenty of games. Why is this one different?

One possible reason is the star quality of the player it affected.  After the ’04 Berrian no-catch, you didn’t see the media hyping the “Bernard Berrian Rule.” Why?  Because nobody would have cared. Berrian wasn’t a household name. Calvin Johnson is. So it makes a great story.

We’ve seen more of this in recent years, most notably with the “Tom Brady Rule.”  How many quarterbacks have seen their season or career ended by knee injuries?  But it took the league losing their poster boy to make changes to the rules that protect a quarterback’s knees.

It also makes a great story to claim that the Lions were robbed of the first home win since 2007. Robbery of any type is generally interesting news.  But when it comes at the expense of a team whose ineptitude over the last few years has made them an almost universally sympathetic figure, it makes for even bigger headlines.

The problem is that the Lions weren’t robbed any more than the Bears were in 2004.  

The rule wasn’t some new obscure rule that players don’t know about. Calvin Johnson understood what his responsibilities were in the catch, and he did not meet them. Blaming the rule for a player not following it is misguided. But rather than questioning why Johnson tried to celebrate before he completed the act he knew he must complete, the questions have all been levied at the NFL Rules Committee, who are a much easier target to take aim at. After all, everybody hates “The Man.”

The Rules committee responded, surprisingly, by holding their ground. Their new video reaffirms both the three action catch rule in the regular field of play and the “Bernard Berrian Rule”…..oops, I mean “Calvin Johnson Rule” in the end zone. The committee determined that changing the rule would create more gray area than leaving the rule to stand as it is.

The Bears Week 1 win over the Lions was thus vindicated.  But hang on to your hats, folks.  Pretty soon, there will be a ruckus over some defender “interfering” with Calvin Johnson’s ability to make a game-winning touchdown by batting the ball away.  I mean, we all know the rules are stupid if they stop Calvin from scoring, regardless of their validity or his own previous knowledge of them.

Read more Chicago Bears news on BleacherReport.com