Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24
  1. #1
    Culpepper_4717's Avatar
    Culpepper_4717 is offline Asst. Coach Chopper Challenge Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    596

    NFL Ends Tuck Rule and Passes Ban on Helmet Crown Hits by Running Backs

    Didn't Really care about the tuck rule, but helmet thing is pure garbage.. Hopefully next year they make the players wear flags on their hips to eliminate all possible danger.

    NFL passes the measures on the tuck rule and the rule change regarding penalties for ball carriers striking with their helmets

    NFL Ends Tuck Rule and Passes Ban on Helmet Crown Hits by Running Backs | Bleacher Report

  2. #2
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Culpepper_4717 View Post
    Didn't Really care about the tuck rule, but helmet thing is pure garbage.. Hopefully next year they make the players wear flags on their hips to eliminate all possible danger.




    NFL Ends Tuck Rule and Passes Ban on Helmet Crown Hits by Running Backs | Bleacher Report
    I agree with you on the lowering the helmet rule, I think it is a mistake. I tried to understand the purpose of it and the practicality of enforcing it, but the more you look at how it will impact how the game is played the more I disagree with the ruling. I think it will backfire on many levels and is yet another judgement call left up to the officials.

    Mayock presents the best case I've heard against it. When I played DB in high school, I was always taught to get lower than the RB. If he nailed me with his helmet, it was my fault for allowing it, and I paid the price as they were usually bigger. I guarantee you it didn't happen very often. If the RB is not allowed to lower his pads and his helmet at contact, he is at a big disadvantage. Their careers will end up being much shorter than they already are. Look out AD, they are coming for your knees.

    This is much different than a DB leading with the helmet as a receiver is hauling in a pass. That one is much easier to understand.

  3. #3
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,533
    I hope the NFL goes bankrupt with all these concussion lawsuits.

    Think I'm officially done watching football.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  4. #4
    Brewtal's Avatar
    Brewtal is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    258
    Until Goodell is gone I do not see a reason to support the NFL. As for the concussion statement, all these overpaid chumps should be laughed out of court. Greedy thugs who should have not blown the millions that got paid playing a sport where they knew there was risk.

  5. #5
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271
    I think it was Emmet Smith who they interviewed and said a RB who is not allowed to get his shoulder & head down to protect himself for a hit just leaves himself vulnerable for some serious injuries.

    He was taught to get down & hit with his shoulders, which obviously brings the head down too. If a ref sees that he can easily believe that to be leading with the head & toss the flag.

    Yet apparently a defender can lead with the crown of his head and take a RB out?

    Exactly how many players have been carted off the field in recent years because they were hit by a RB that caused this rule to be implemented?

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  6. #6
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    I think it was Emmet Smith who they interviewed and said a RB who is not allowed to get his shoulder & head down to protect himself for a hit just leaves himself vulnerable for some serious injuries.

    He was taught to get down & hit with his shoulders, which obviously brings the head down too. If a ref sees that he can easily believe that to be leading with the head & toss the flag.

    Yet apparently a defender can lead with the crown of his head and take a RB out?

    Exactly how many players have been carted off the field in recent years because they were hit by a RB that caused this rule to be implemented?
    You're way off.

    New helmet-use rule is more narrow, limited than believed | ProFootballTalk
    The new rule prohibits ball carriers and defensive players from initiating contact in the open field with the crown of the helmet. The crown, as explained by Rams coach Jeff Fisher, is the top of the helmet. The facemask and hairline of the helmet may still be used to initiate contact.

    Fisher emphasized that ball carriers will be permitted to protect themselves, by dropping their pads and dipping their helmets. A foul arises only if the top of the helmet is used to ram the opponent.
    I really like this rule. It'll force guys to see what they hit, theoretically there should be less missed tackles as a result. And really it's not much of a change. There's so many times where you're not allowed to lead with the crown of the helmet already. Hopefully they get rid of the defenseless receiver rule and a couple other rules that deal with weaponizing the helmet. They're redundant at this point.

  7. #7
    gregair13's Avatar
    gregair13 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    14,597
    I think the rule is still very hard to enforce/prevent. But after watching a little bit of the coverage on NFLN today, I can agree that this rule will protect a lot of players from some dangerous knockout hits.

    Does not really matter to AP. By the time he is out of the tackle box, everyone else is on their ass or miles behind him already.
    We're bringing purple back.

  8. #8
    Culpepper_4717's Avatar
    Culpepper_4717 is offline Asst. Coach Chopper Challenge Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    596
    Memories

  9. #9
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Anderson View Post
    You're way off.

    The new rule prohibits ball carriers and defensive players from initiating contact in the open field with the crown of the helmet. The crown, as explained by Rams coach Jeff Fisher, is the top of the helmet. The facemask and hairline of the helmet may still be used to initiate contact.

    Fisher emphasized that ball carriers will be permitted to protect themselves, by dropping their pads and dipping their helmets. A foul arises only if the top of the helmet is used to ram the opponent.
    I really like this rule. It'll force guys to see what they hit, theoretically there should be less missed tackles as a result. And really it's not much of a change. There's so many times where you're not allowed to lead with the crown of the helmet already. Hopefully they get rid of the defenseless receiver rule and a couple other rules that deal with weaponizing the helmet. They're redundant at this point.
    I'm not way off. I was only wrong about believing this rule was being applied to ball carriers. The rest stands.

    They can say that ball carriers will be permitted to protect themselves, by dropping their pads and dipping their helmets & that a foul arises only if the top of the helmet is used to ram the opponent, but in reality it's up to the refs discretion to decide if the ball carrier was leading with his shoulder or with his head. When in doubt, they'll throw the flag, just like they do when a QB gets grazed in the helmet unintentionally by a falling defender or on so many other of these "judgement" calls. If the ref sees the head go down & thinks it touched the body, the flag gets tossed.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  10. #10
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Culpepper_4717 View Post
    Memories
    That's right. Some Vikings fans are behind this rule, but will probably still get pissed when AD gets flagged/penalized for it this season.

    Of course, this will have a huge impact on how runners are able to finish plays. Some powerful players like Adrian Peterson have used this style for years and could be in for a rude awakening.
    I don't think a RB who has run the way he has all of his life as he was taught to can instantaneously change it from what has become instinctual.

    But hey, it's still legal to hit defenders with his face. No possible injuries could happen there.
    Last edited by singersp; 03-22-2013 at 05:43 AM.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •