+ Reply to Thread
Page 13 of 35 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 341
  1. #121
    Moderator YATittle1962's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Uncle YA
    Posts
    18,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Roosevelt View Post
    This has to have been a concern for everyone.

    I think the NFL owes it to us to put up video of the kind of contact that will warrant a flag.

    T
    NFL Executive VP of Football Operations Ray Anderson was on the Stephen A Smith show today stating that they are prepared to do just that .

    he had a very clear description of the rule .....and it still seams ridiculous to me

    I understand they player safety is of the utmost importance .....but officiating this rule is going to be a nightmare and someone is going to make a judgement call in a very important game and the sky will fall

    this is football....a full contact violent game that every one of these guys signed their name on a contract to play with the full and clear understanding that the possibility of future health issues is an absolute possibility
    Last edited by YATittle1962; 03-20-2013 at 04:14 PM.

  2. #122
    Veteran CowboysSuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Posts
    2,407
    I mean its a close call. I want to say most of these hit would be legal by the new rule, but then again some of them may have been illegal. What do you guys think?


  3. #123
    Veteran CowboysSuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Posts
    2,407
    Not going to lie, I think Bradshaw made a living off of this earlier in his career.

    I've also seen Wilson lead into a defender with the crown of his helmet.

    I must say, I like the theory behind the rule. If defenders cant lead with the helmet, why should a RB be able to spear you with his? Lets just wait and see how this is actually enforced before we cry and whine that the NFL is turning into a 2-hand-touch league.

  4. #124
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    42,086
    Quote Originally Posted by gmenfan0488 View Post
    Running backs can't drop their pad level anymore. They can't lead with the helmets now. All runners need to run straight upright now . ifhey get low at all, it's a penality. Head up, chin up, so many more concussions are going to happen now, more broken jaws, etc. You cannot get down to protect yourself whatsoever because it will be construed as a penalty.
    I am under the impression that they can lower their heads. Its really about using your head in a flagrant way as a battering ram.
    I think the uproar may be misguided here. Its not about being forced to run upright at all. Its only about using your head as a weapon as a runner.
    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  5. #125
    Moderator YATittle1962's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Uncle YA
    Posts
    18,653
    wait and see how many "leading with the crown" calls are made when the runner blows a safety over with his shoulder

    watch

    they expect these 60 year old plus men to make these hair splitting calls that change games ...at full speed

    you are going to see coaches pulling their hair out on the sidelines wishing they never voted for this ridiculous uncallable rule

    more judgement calls to ruin the game

    I feel bad for you Marshawn Lynch, Frank Gore, Stephen Jackson, etc...
    Last edited by YATittle1962; 03-20-2013 at 04:25 PM.

  6. #126
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by Cloud57 View Post
    so this eliminates the powerback? all you need now is a guy who can run around people.
    It's only if your running several yards ahead and you lower your head to clearly ram someone. If your on the line of scrimmage and its in the tackle box it's fine. Using it as a weapon to ram someone is different than lowering your ahead to protect yourself.

  7. #127
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    532
    The uproar is because with most any arbitrary rule that relies on the judgement of the official they get it wrong just as much if not more than they get it right. In this case though there is no ability to challenge the call and games absolutely will eventually be decided by this and that is not a good thing.

  8. #128
    The oringinal poster is exaggerating the new rule change. Backs can get low, they can run behind their shoulders, they just cannot lower the crown of their helmet.

    In truth, this rule has always existed as lowering the crown of your helmet has ALWAYS been illegal. It is called a spear. It was just never called on offensive players. Now, it will be as it has been made a point of emphasis.

  9. #129
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by gmen46 View Post
    Correct. The rule won't be an issue in these situations because under the rule there will be no violation by the RB within the Tackle box, which is defined for this rule as the area tackle-to-tackle and up to 3 yards beyond the LOS, End-to-End.The intent of this rule, as I understand it, is to minimize the number of times a RB in open field situations has a head of steam and clearly lowers his head in order to ram an opponent straight on. Though not mentioned yet in this thread, the rule also applies to defenders who hit a RB with the crown of their helmet, straight on, in the open field. Which is the same as "spearing" really, which of course has been illegal for decades. The "crown of the helmet" was fairly narrowly defined by an NFL spokesmen as "imagine a beanie on the top of a helmet"."Incidental" contact of helmets and tackles on a RB running sideline-to-sideline will not be violations. I know there are some high profile RBs--current and retired--who've spoken negatively about the rule, at first blush. But I find the response from arguably the best RB in NFL history to be interesting and relevant to the issue--The moment the NFLís new proposal to stop running backs from lowering the crown of their helmets at defenders came out, tailbacks immediately criticized the possible change. Matt Forte took to Twitter, calling the thought ďabsurdĒ and saying itís impossible to lower oneís shoulder without the head following.But at least one running back, and heís a big one, disagrees. Hall of Famer Jim Brown is a believer in the new rule, and said itís entirely possible to abide by it.ďI didnít use my head,Ē Brown said at the NFL meetings in Phoenix. ďI used my forearm. The palm of my hand. And my shoulder. And my shoulder pads. I wasnít putting my head into too much of anything. I donít think thatís a good idea.ĒďAt least it doesnít sound like a good idea to me if Iím not guaranteed that my head is going to be strong enough to hurt somebody else and not hurt myself,Ē Brown added.Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...#ixzz2O71hFD11
    That's what annoys me about some D players these days. Most D players would rather ram a guy or push than actually wrap their arms around them. Every time I look at LT, the 85 bears, the steel curtain, the 2000 ravens.... They are all wrapping their arms around them.

  10. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by YATittle1962 View Post
    when a runner lowers his pad level upon impact do you think he has time to calculate what part of his body is going to connect with the defender?
    do you think the runner and defender have a nice friendly agreement about what parts of their body they will not impact with

    this is ridiculous and officiating this in real time is going to be a nightmare

    yes I played the game on every level......and its absolutely ridiculous

    do they want these guys to lower their pad level and keep their heads up and get it knocked off by a safety ?

    this rule is the beginning of the end of the game we all love

    a game made for men is becoming a game made for *******
    As a runner you can lowerer your pad level and lead with your shoulder. its possible I have done it multiple times. Now! I am not saying that there will not be instances where it is inevtable that the head is apart of the first impact. but they are not looking for those instances where its just a happenstance they are from what i read about the ruling change looking for blatant violators. The helmet does not protect from concussion, the brain is going to rattle inside the spaces of the cranium, they are just trying to prevent the same issues the former player are now complaining they need benifits for.

Posting Permissions

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