Let's practice the mantra: Consistency over common sense. Consistency over common sense. Consistency over common sense.

That's probably the best way to explain how the NFL's "process of the catch" rule has played out over the first five weeks of the season. By now, there should be no surprise. We all need to get with the program, at least until the offseason, or we're going to be wasting far too much outrage over the next four months.

The latest example came Sunday at the Georgia Dome, where it appeared to 70,000 or so eyes that Atlanta Falcons running back Devonta Freeman had scored the winning points on a 12-yard reception. Referee Bill Vinovich's crew ruled a touchdown, even as the ball trickled out of Freeman's hands and into the end zone at the end of the play. More than anything, the ensuing review -- mandatory on all scoring plays -- seemed likely to focus on whether Freeman's knee touched the ground before he extended the ball over the goal line.

But, of course, anyone who saw the Calvin Johnson play in 2010 or the Dez Bryant play last year or the Tyler Eifert play earlier this season knew better. The ball came to rest in Freeman's hands as he crossed the 2-yard line, but already he was falling to the ground as the result of Washington Redskins linebacker Will Compton's tackle attempt.

By the wording of Rule 3, Section 2, Article 7, Item 2, which requires a receiver to "clearly become a runner" in order to make a legal catch, Freeman hadn't yet established possession when the ball crossed the goal line. Because it went loose upon contact with the ground, Freeman technically never had possession. The pass, by definition if not the eye test, was incomplete. Freeman took steps forward, as a runner would, but not before he started falling to the ground.

Confusion spiked in Week 4 when two other receivers lost control of the ball while going to the ground but were confirmed to have made a legal catch upon review. The key difference, which I outlined in detail, was that both receivers -- the Kansas City Chiefs' Jeremy Maclin and the Minnesota Vikings' Stefon Diggs -- took multiple steps forward to establish as a runner before encountering the contact that took them to the ground. Those plays were fumbles, not incomplete passes.

It doesn't take a football expert to sit here each week and diagram the differences between these plays. You have no justified reason to throw up your hands and claim you don't know what a catch is, or that the NFL can't decide how to define one. Independent of whether it makes sense, the call has been made consistently this year.

But it shouldn't require a replay review, or a postgame distillation, to understand the difference between a catch and an incomplete pass. If so many fans and other observers have failed to catch on, so to speak, the NFL must find a more organic answer.

In Week 3 -- yes, this has been a weekly story in 2015 -- I explained why the league established the "runner" requirement and what it fears would happen if it, well, dropped it. (In brief, those incomplete passes would become fumbles.) Clearly, the time has come for the NFL to test those fears. It's one thing for a play or two per season to be affected. It's quite another to need weekly explanations for what should be one of the most basic plays in football.

The non-call on Clay Matthews

Sometimes, a dive into the recent history of an officiating crew can help explain why a call is or isn't made. A good example from Week 5 is Green Bay Packers linebacker Clay Matthews' post-throw hit on St. Louis Rams quarterback Nick Foles.

On the play, Matthews lowered his head and drove the top of his helmet into Foles' chest. The contact seemed to violate Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9(c) of the rulebook, which prohibits the use of the top/crown of the helmet against any part of the passer's body. Referee Brad Allen did not make the call for roughing the quarterback.

Allen's recent history as a referee gives us a partial explanation. His crew is one of the NFL's stingiest, and its average of 15 penalties (accepted, declined and offset) per game was tied for the league low after Week 4.

More notably, Allen has called only one roughing the quarterback penalty since he entered the NFL at the start of the 2014 season, according to ESPN Stats & Information's database. During that span, the other 16 NFL referees called 123 such penalties.

This is not to make a judgment on the accuracy or validity of Allen's performance. It's simply to demonstrate that, as in other sport leagues, NFL officiating crews have clear tendencies. There is little doubt that Allen has a higher standard for what constitutes roughing the passer than do most of his contemporaries.

It's always possible that no one on Allen's crew saw the top of Matthews' helmet hit Foles. But based on the data, it's more likely that Allen simply didn't judge the contact to be obvious enough to merit a penalty.

Offensive pass interference on the Eagles -- again

Officiating tendencies might also explain why the Philadelphia Eagles had the unusual experience of two offensive pass interference penalties in one quarter Sunday against the New Orleans Saints.

Early in the second quarter, referee Ronald Torbert's crew called receiver Nelson Agholor for a pick on a pass that was targeted to teammate Jordan Matthews. Then, with two minutes remaining, Matthews was penalized for pushing Saints cornerback Keenan Lewis to the ground at the start of his route.

By the technical definition, both calls were defensible. But we all know there is plenty of contact between receivers and defenders on every play, especially at a time when offensive coordinators are using pick plays liberally. Why did the Eagles get singled out in this case?

A quick look at Torbert's history shows that his crew entered Week 5 with seven calls for offensive pass interference, the most in the NFL. That figure was nearly twice as high as the next-most-frequent crew. Five crews called just one OPI penalty over that span.

NFL teams track similar data. While it might not directly impact the devising of game plans, you can rest assured that players are reminded which penalties they're more or less likely to get away with based on these tendencies. A team such as the Eagles, with aggressive receiver schemes, are predisposed to receiving more OPI calls when Torbert's crew is officiating.