cityofRaven 2,453 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 Hope all you crybaby Goodell apologists are happy about this one. Football as we all have grown to love is being torn apart for the "safety" of those who make millions to play a game. You can't have it both ways. Either you embrace the game as it has always been, and compensate everyone involved accordingly or you make this a two-hand touch passing league and cut everyone's pay tremendously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuceswild 15 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 It's not proper technique anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futbolking 766 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 Since when does a coach teach anybody to "lead with the head"...if so, they have been teaching the kids wrong....As far as I know, football coaches have always taught to tackle with your head up... I'd rather see a guy make a great tackle and walk away afterwards, then lead with the head and risk not walking away at all. I'm glad to see this happen, so yes I am happy about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityofRaven 2,453 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 I'm talking Running Backs. All running backs will lower their heads to run over a defender. Why not just make it two-hand touch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityofRaven 2,453 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 It’s FOOTBALL for a reason. There’s a reason that scout team, yes scout team players, individuals who don’t even dress on Sundays, make $88,000+ a year. Just think about this for a moment, that’s $30,000 more than a Non-Commissioned Officer in the United States Military earns in a year. And might I add that a scout-team player in the NFL works 3-4 days a week. So if you want to take these head shots and hard hits out of football to make it safer it shouldn’t be unreasonable for all these players salary’s to be cut tremendously. You can’t have it both ways. It is dangerous but they get well compensated for it. If they don't like it then get another job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futbolking 766 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 As long as people keep watching them play....they will continue to get paid the big bucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuceswild 15 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Still not proper technique. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sup_rbeast 296 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Still not proper technique. Besides holding onto the ball and not fumbling...what exactly do you call proper technique? IMO Earl Campbell had a damn fine technique..as did Walter Payton, Larry Csonka, and Emmitt Smith. All of these runners lowered their heads to run over tacklers. If they really are concerned about safety, they might as well take away their helmets so there would be no player desiring contact to the head. At the rate they are going that's where they will get there eventually anyways. Football has always been unique in that players were equipment that protects them during COLLISIONS....and every player should expect some health problems after 10-15 years of playing. IMO if that isn't acceptable, they can always look for another career..no one is twisting their arms to play football. But some of these rule changes in the name of "safety" is watering down the sport and taking some of the excitement of the games with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixcat 2,942 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 The way I understand it after seeing some clarification of the new rule this morning, you can "lower the head" just not "lead with the crown". To me, that's proper technique anyway. Nobody with any sense has ever taught a football player, regardless of position, to lead with the crown of the head. It was explained in great detail on ESPN this morning by Jeff Fisher that from the hairline to the face mask is perfect technique and perfectly legal. With all of that said, NFL officiating will have to get substantially better to make real time judgement calls on what is proper technique and considered a penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuceswild 15 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Besides holding onto the ball and not fumbling...what exactly do you call proper technique? IMO Earl Campbell had a damn fine technique..as did Walter Payton, Larry Csonka, and Emmitt Smith. All of these runners lowered their heads to run over tacklers. If they really are concerned about safety, they might as well take away their helmets so there would be no player desiring contact to the head. At the rate they are going that's where they will get there eventually anyways. Football has always been unique in that players were equipment that protects them during COLLISIONS....and every player should expect some health problems after 10-15 years of playing. IMO if that isn't acceptable, they can always look for another career..no one is twisting their arms to play football. But some of these rule changes in the name of "safety" is watering down the sport and taking some of the excitement of the games with it. Easy there drama queen. Lowering your head implies looking straight down at the ground and subjecting your neck and cranium to some undue punishment. But as sixcat clarified, that is better described as "leading with the crown", which is improper technique and dangerously foolish. Simply buckling down to protect the football with your shoulder which involves lowering the head is still permissible and fine. I've watched several of our local kids nearly break their necks by leading with the crown of their helmet, there's nothing tough about being paralyzed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoard 18 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 All these changes in the name of safety wouldnt be necessary if not for all the current and potential lawsuits by former players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsons 178 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 (edited) It’s FOOTBALL for a reason. There’s a reason that scout team, yes scout team players, individuals who don’t even dress on Sundays, make $88,000+ a year. Just think about this for a moment, that’s $30,000 more than a Non-Commissioned Officer in the United States Military earns in a year. And might I add that a scout-team player in the NFL works 3-4 days a week. So if you want to take these head shots and hard hits out of football to make it safer it shouldn’t be unreasonable for all these players salary’s to be cut tremendously. You can’t have it both ways. It is dangerous but they get well compensated for it. If they don't like it then get another job. They're compensated well because we tune in every week, not because of the risk of injury. NFL ratings were through the roof this past season and I can't recall a time when games were any more enjoyable to watch. I can certainly live with a few less violent collisions, especially if it means there are fewer moments when everyone is staring at someone laying motionless on the field. These players have parents, wives, and children who all suffer along with the player when a catastrophic injury occurs. No amount of compensation can pay for the anguish and altered lifestyles of family members of someone paralyzed on the playing field. Edited March 21, 2013 by parsons Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hacker 82 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Like any employer faced with a workplace safety issue, the NFL is taking steps to limit the risk on the job. Is it motivated by sincere interest in the health and safety of their employees, fear of potential lawsuits, or their insurance underwriters telling them to clean things up? In the end, the game is going to have to change, or it will eventually fade from the public eye; much like boxing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Easy there drama queen. Lowering your head implies looking straight down at the ground and subjecting your neck and cranium to some undue punishment. But as sixcat clarified, that is better described as "leading with the crown", which is improper technique and dangerously foolish. Simply buckling down to protect the football with your shoulder which involves lowering the head is still permissible and fine. I've watched several of our local kids nearly break their necks by leading with the crown of their helmet, there's nothing tough about being paralyzed. BUT YOU AIN'T NO REAL MAN IF YOU DON'T DROP THAT THAR HEAD 'N PLOW 'EM WITH ALLS YOU GOT!!! But yes...this rule's being blown out of proportion. BIG difference in lowering the head and leading with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barondawg77 115 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Ive been around football for over 30 years. I have never taught, or been coached to lower my head. Its called lowering your shoulder or bend your knees. If a coach is teaching kids to lower their head then he needs to be fired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebel1 35 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 Only problem I have with rule change is this is going to be a nightmare on sundays with officials trying to make these calls. Ed Hochuli better be on his game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futbolking 766 Report Share Posted March 21, 2013 I'm talking Running Backs. All running backs will lower their heads to run over a defender. Why not just make it two-hand touch? Thanks for clarifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHS03 99 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 BUT YOU AIN'T NO REAL MAN IF YOU DON'T DROP THAT THAR HEAD 'N PLOW 'EM WITH ALLS YOU GOT!!! But yes...this rule's being blown out of proportion. BIG difference in lowering the head and leading with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sup_rbeast 296 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 But as sixcat clarified, that is better described as "leading with the crown", which is improper technique and dangerously foolish. Simply buckling down to protect the football with your shoulder which involves lowering the head is still permissible and fine. I've watched several of our local kids nearly break their necks by leading with the crown of their helmet, there's nothing tough about being paralyzed. You don't hit anyone with the top of the helmet...any fool knows that will get ya knocked out. But wait and see, this rule will be applied anytime someone loses a helmet during a collision or everytime a RB lowers their head to get extra yards and there is helmet contact. Y'all can whine about it being in the name of safety, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you play football, you are going to get hit in the head...if that's a problem, play golf. IMO, the NFL was as safe as it needed to be considering the salaries these guys get to put themselves in harms way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixcat 2,942 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 You don't hit anyone with the top of the helmet...any fool knows that will get ya knocked out. But wait and see, this rule will be applied anytime someone loses a helmet during a collision or everytime a RB lowers their head to get extra yards and there is helmet contact. Y'all can whine about it being in the name of safety, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you play football, you are going to get hit in the head...if that's a problem, play golf. IMO, the NFL was as safe as it needed to be considering the salaries these guys get to put themselves in harms way. I may be splitting hairs but the rule, as written, is fine and I agree with it. Enforcement of the rule is an all together different issue and that seems to me to be your biggest hangup with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueinbama 259 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 There has to be some middle ground somewhere. Nobody wants to see anyone badly hurt due to a head-on collision. The issue as I see it is when a player uses the helmet as a weapon. That happens much more often on defense. I did, however, see a few plays last season where a running back used the helmet to punish a tackler. The problem comes in enforcing it consistently. I think that's going to be almost impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sup_rbeast 296 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 I may be splitting hairs but the rule, as written, is fine and I agree with it. Enforcement of the rule is an all together different issue and that seems to me to be your biggest hangup with it. The enforcement will be the problem...anytime you give refs more leeway to influence the outcome of a game, the rule is bad. I think if they would just enforce the rules on spearing and butting, that would be adequate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futbolking 766 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 The enforcement will be the problem...anytime you give refs more leeway to influence the outcome of a game, the rule is bad. I think if they would just enforce the rules on spearing and butting, that would be adequate. I think you'll probably see an over abundance of penalties this next season...since it's a new rule... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsons 178 Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 (edited) I think you'll probably see an over abundance of penalties this next season...since it's a new rule... I kind of doubt it myself. The NFL says that a review of the film from this past season determined there would have been 11 instances in which a flag should have been thrown. Since the rule will not apply on runs between the tackles, I don't believe that officials will really have that hard of a time determining when to throw a flag....but we'll see. Either way, I like the rule, especially as a tool for getting coaches at the lower levels to discourage the use of leading with the head. Edited March 23, 2013 by parsons Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.