Dallas Cowboys wide receiver Dez Bryant catches a pass against the Green Bay Packers during the second half Sunday in Green Bay. The play was reversed, and the Packers won, 26-21. (Matt Ludtke/Associated Press)

Good morning,

How many calls overruling receptions such as the one that Cowboys receiver Dez Bryant made Sunday will it take before the NFL rules makers correct the gross requirements for a catch to be legal?

Instead of everyone talking about how great the games were over the weekend, the No. 1 topic again is a rule that may have kept the Cowboys out of the NFC championship game.

Some will say it’s karma because the Cowboys were the recipient of what appeared to be a wrong pickup of the flag on a pass interference call against the Detroit Lions put Dallas in Sunday’s playoff game anyway.

But that’s not the point.

Pittsburgh native Gene Steratore (Washington, Pa.) made the correct call on an appeal by Green Bay coach Mike McCarthy, another Pittsburgh native, on what was ruled a catch by Bryant at the Packers’ one. Steratore overturned the ruling – although he may have help back in the home office of the NFL in New York.

The rule states that if the receiver does not hang onto the ball when he hits the ground he must have made a “football move” beforehand. Bryant did lose the ball and in the estimate of Steratore – and, by the way, most officiating experts including Mike Pereira, the former NFL head of officiating – he did not make such a move.

Anyone who knows anything about football knows that was a great catch but by the letter of the law, not a catch. It’s time for the NFL to change that rule. Make the catch, two feet hit the ground in-bounds, it’s a catch. Period. If you then fall to the ground and lose the ball, it’s a fumble if you were not touched, you are down right there if you were touched.

Why make it more complicated than that? I do not remember this being an issue at all 10 years ago. It’s as if a gaggle of nerds got hold of the NFL rule book and worked on that one to where it is today, an accountant’s version of what is a catch and what is not.

Mike Tomlin is on the NFL’s competition committee that recommends rules changes. This should be high on their list.

--- YOU: There's a theory out there that the Steelers were 'surprised' by Dick Le Beau's resignation. I believe the only 'surprise' occurred when Le Beau spoke to a local reporter from his Ohio hometown (thus giving said reporter the scoop of his career!) instead of allowing the Steelers to manage the news via their PR people. Tomlin appeared set to let Le Beau go when he was non-committal on the subject at an earlier presser, so its hard to buy that Dick 'surprised' them in any significant way. Am I missing something?

Also, is there a 4-3 in their immediate future? Surely it would take years to re-tool.

ED: Greetings to you in Australia. If anyone was surprised by the move, they have not been around much. Ron Cook wrote an excellent column on Dec. 7 on LeBeau possibly not returning.

I asked Mike Tomlin last Tuesday about LeBeau’s status and Tomlin said simply he had not talked to LeBeau and I pointed out how unusual Tomlin’s response was from previous times.

I do not think they will switch to a 4-3 because they are not built that way. However, you could see them do what a few other teams have done in the past and play some kind of hybrid, moving between the 3-4 and 4-3 on occasion.

--- Onto your Ask Ed questions:

--- YOU: I wanted to ask you if you thought that the decision of "allowing" Dick Lebeau to resign had more to do with their concerns over losing Keith Butler (since his contract is expiring) than them having an issue with Dick Lebeau and his ability to call the defense? Sort of like when the Packers made the decision to play Aaron Rodgers over Brett Favre (after is 14th retirement announcement) - Rodgers was going to be a free agent I think a year later, and I don't think they wanted to take a chance in losing him.... What are you thoughts on the matter.... One last thing, if that is the reason, do you think they spoke to Butler prior to asking Lebeau to step down? Otherwise, they could end up with a new coaching search.

ED: Yes, I do suspect Butler’s status could have had something to do with LeBeau leaving. Sooner or later, they had to make that switch. I know LeBeau wants to keep coaching and I know he would have preferred to do it here. If they thought they were going to lose Butler and wanted him to stay, making that move now is the only thing that makes sense.

--- YOU: Ok, Coach Lebeau is gone. Keith Butler is the presumed replacement. Do we know if his philosophies are much the same as Lebeau’s or has he shown indications of being more amenable to doing some different things to better match the talent on hand, ie., using more 4-3 looks, etc?? For that matter, is there any indication that the Steelers will look outside the organization for a new DC??

ED: Butler has his own ideas and as Gerry Dulac wrote in today’s PG, he will implement them if he gets the job, and he is scheduled to talk to Mike Tomlin this morning about that job.

--- YOU: Don't understand all the articles I have been reading saying "Jason Worilds was used a lot or more often than not in pass coverage as opposed to pass rushing". I thought his strength and reason they gave him the transition tag at least for a year was supposedly pass rushing skills, it's not like that scheme worked and Steelers had less sacks than a year ago which was also low.

ED: He rushes more than he covers receivers in passing situations, but the point is, should he rush more often than he did? In Dick LeBeau’s 3-4 zone blitzing scheme, linebackers have to drop into zone coverage at times or the whole scheme doesn’t work. Even Kevin Greene and Joey Porter would drop into coverage. I’ve seen big nose tackles drop into a zone coverage. The next question is, should they? With LeBeau gone and perhaps Keith Butler taking over, that philosophy could change or at least altered somewhat.

--- YOU: Is there any rational argument for the following two decisions:

(1) drafting a QB in the 4th round of the 2013 draft instead of a player at a position where it was KNOWN that a hole would need to be filled with either a starter or a 2nd stringer either in that coming season or the next, or

(2) NOT picking up Ben Tate immediately after he became available in Week 16 since logic dictates that you must have known at the time that he would be the preferable option to Archer and Harris since that was your preference just 2 weeks later (in other words, you consciously decided to carry inferior backup RB's over a player you KNEW you preferred...and you made that same decision 2 weeks in a row during a playoff chase)? I can't think of even a far-fetched logical reason for either decision.

ED: I did not think they should have drafted Landry Jones in the fourth round in 2013 and said so. But they did at least have a reason: They wanted to get younger at the position after having Charlie Batch and Byron Leftwich as their backups. He was not drafted to be Ben Roethlisberger’s replacement. Jones has done nothing in his two years to show that was a good draft pick. When the Cleveland Browns released Ben Tate, he was subject to waivers and the Minnesota Vikings claimed him, then kept him on their roster until Dec. 23. He was never available for the Steelers to sign until then, and they did so one week later.

--- YOU: should the Steelers consider moving Ryan Shazier to safety?

Shazier doesn't really seem to have the body type to play ILB in the NFL, and maybe not the durability. His greatest assets are his speed and overall athletic ability. These were more than enough in college, where I believe he played at around 227, bulking up to his current weight as he entered the NFL; he's sort of a pumped-up (cue Hans and Franz) safety as it is.

Would it be feasible, to have him drop to say the 215-220 range and change his position? It could conceivably make him even quicker and faster?!

ED: I have wondered if Ryan Shazier could play safety with the speed he has, however, I never suggested they move him there, especially as he enters his second season after they made him the 15th overall pick in the 2014 draft with the idea that he would play the mack inside linebacker position. Carnell Lake made that move from college linebacker to strong safety (and then to cornerback when they needed him), but that not only was rare, they drafted him as a safety and not a linebacker.

First Published: April 6, 2016, 4:09 p.m.