Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

NFL: NFL rule changes

Rescinding the tuck rule was long overdue, anyway (about 12 or 13 years overdue if you're a Raiders fan).

I'm on the fence about the leading with the crown of the helmet penalty. On one hand, it makes sense that if defensive players can't lead with their helmets, then why should offensive players be able to? But for running backs, especially violent downhill runners like AP, this has to be a concern. I guess we'll have to see how it's going to be called.
 
There should be a way to penalize offensive players for dangerous hits and plays just like they can penalize defensive players.
 
Someone I know posted on FB yesterday that now it's illegal to make a blind side block also. (even if your head is in front of the guy & it's an otherwise legal block)

Anyone else see that anywhere? I haven't had a chance to look it up. If it's true, I definitely don't like this one. Part of football is keeping your head on a swivel so that doesn't happen to you!
 
All you need to know about the helmet rule is that the NFL cannot prevent head injury. They can only create a perception that they are proactive about head injury. When you have guys that big that can run that fast there is no rule that can prevent concussions. It is and always has been a part of the game. They aren't willing to admit that even casually for sake of litigation. That's all this is about. They would be better off agreeing to take some of the billions - pay the veterans insurance or pay them out with a stip that they cannot sue. Then they can leave the game as is which is what the consumer wants. No helmet - rule - or lack of rule will EVER stop head trauma. The worst part of this rule is that it is reviewable. Lovely.
 
Tailg8er said:
Someone I know posted on FB yesterday that now it's illegal to make a blind side block also. (even if your head is in front of the guy & it's an otherwise legal block)

Anyone else see that anywhere? I haven't had a chance to look it up. If it's true, I definitely don't like this one. Part of football is keeping your head on a swivel so that doesn't happen to you!
Click to expand...
No peel back blocks below the waste
 
jbindm said:
Rescinding the tuck rule was long overdue, anyway (about 12 or 13 years overdue if you're a Raiders fan).

I'm on the fence about the leading with the crown of the helmet penalty. On one hand, it makes sense that if defensive players can't lead with their helmets, then why should offensive players be able to? But for running backs, especially violent downhill runners like AP, this has to be a concern. I guess we'll have to see how it's going to be called.
Click to expand...


Either leading with the helmet is dangerous or it isn't. If it is dangerous, disallow it. If it isn't let all of the players do it. Running backs need to lead with their shoulder just like everyone else has to.
 
As a Raiders fan thank goodness the tuck rule is gone. That call might have been worse than the Phantom Three in the Phog......

Have a strong dislike of officials
 
Tailg8er said:
Below the waist I can understand. He just made this sound like any crack back type block where a guy isn't looking.
Click to expand...

I think a couple years ago they did ban these if it is away from the play, but maybe only on change of possession plays like fumbles and interceptions. Ones like the Warren Sapp hit that broke Chad Clifton's hip a few years back. I think there was another specific one more recently that prompted the rule change.
 
kberyldial said:
All you need to know about the helmet rule is that the NFL cannot prevent head injury. They can only create a perception that they are proactive about head injury. When you have guys that big that can run that fast there is no rule that can prevent concussions. It is and always has been a part of the game. They aren't willing to admit that even casually for sake of litigation. That's all this is about. They would be better off agreeing to take some of the billions - pay the veterans insurance or pay them out with a stip that they cannot sue. Then they can leave the game as is which is what the consumer wants. No helmet - rule - or lack of rule will EVER stop head trauma. The worst part of this rule is that it is reviewable. Lovely.
Click to expand...

agreed that this has more to do with litigation defense than player safety. I disagree on the bolded part. NFL ratings are doing just fine since the league started implementing these new "safety" rules. Anyone making the "they're killing the game" argument ought to mention it to the record number of people watching every Sunday. Apparently they don't know about it.
 
I knocked a kid out in high school freshman year peel back blocking on a punt return. I understand the rule.
 
Now if they'd just outlaw stiff arms to the helmet since you can get flagged for illegal hands to the face we'd be getting somewhere.

And the article I read yesterday where it said, "You can't put your pad level down without dropping your head." Uhhhh yeah you can...we had to do so every time we went in for a tackle in high school or coach was on our ***.
 
Mr Janny said:
agreed that this has more to do with litigation defense than player safety. I disagree on the bolded part. NFL ratings are doing just fine since the league started implementing these new "safety" rules. Anyone making the "they're killing the game" argument ought to mention it to the record number of people watching every Sunday. Apparently they don't know about it.
Click to expand...

I for one do not want more replays, especially on collisions between running backs and defenders at the line of scrimmage! I'm not saying interest in the NFL is waning or will continue to wane. However, they aren't making the game the safer. They are only muddying the waters for officials that already have to huddle on nearly every penalty. The perception that NFL players are safer is all the league and the owners are interested in. The consumer could care less. The players quite frankly could care less. That's not to say I think guys should be getting blown up on crossing routes. I'm only saying that when you have men that size that run that fast - NO penalty or rule makes the game safer. It only means there are more opportunities for arbitrary flags and more game stoppage. I'll still watch.
 
Just another rule that means football is on the way out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back