03-20-2013, 02:55 PM | #52 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Quote:
As though this were the only rule change in recent memory? I'm sorry, but effectively telling a RB he shouldn't lower his head as part of an effort to overpower a would-be tackler might be among the 3-5 dumbest things I've ever heard in the history of sports. That's into the very essence of football afaic, power vs strength.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
|
03-20-2013, 02:58 PM | #53 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
We'll have to see how the new rule plays out and how often it's actually called (my guess is it will be almost never), but do you really miss defenders launching themselves head first into receivers? DBs didn't really play like that in the 80s and most of the 90s, were you able to stomach football then? |
|
03-20-2013, 03:00 PM | #54 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
|
Quote:
I disagree completely with Jon on the necessity of these moves, but agree completely with this - the average fun doesn't give a fuck that the athletes are hurt, beyond mild platitudes about "Playing hard." Listening to message board types talk about pussification (jeez, look at your FOFC thread, where some old out of shape dude talks about so and so lacking guts to go through the middle ) - you're closer to the center of NFL fandom. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:03 PM | #55 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
I don't think fans care about week-to-week injuries and whether or not Steve Young is forgetful now, but there's also the perception that football killed Junior Seau (and some other former players). Just wait until an ex-football player shoots up a shopping mall. Defense attorneys are already citing CTE as a mitigating factor in sentences for violent crimes (even where the brain hasn't been tested because the guy isn't dead yet - that BU group seems to have concluded that almost all football players have brain damage). Reality or not, it's a strong perception. Last edited by molson : 03-20-2013 at 03:05 PM. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:11 PM | #56 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: the yo'
|
They said that it would have been called 11 times in 32 sampled games.
|
03-20-2013, 03:12 PM | #57 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
still the top play on sportscenter
Spoiler
Last edited by NorvTurnerOverdrive : 03-20-2013 at 03:20 PM. |
03-20-2013, 03:15 PM | #58 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
If he had time it would have been legal for him to put his head down there.
|
03-20-2013, 03:16 PM | #59 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
So if players completely ignore and disregard the rule we'll see it called once every 3 games or so. More likely, at least some players will try to restrain themselves so we're probably looking at more like once every 5 or 6 games. The NFL will survive. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:19 PM | #60 |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Appleton, WI
|
This may be a dumb question, but has "spearing" been taken out of the rule books? I thought the head-first ban had always been there.
|
03-20-2013, 03:20 PM | #61 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
|
Quote:
Yeah, but how long does that last? Take the Junior Seau stuff - short-term outrage, NY Times editorials, etc etc... and since then ... nothing. Again, I'm on the side that football and the way it treats its players is nothing short of disgusting, but I'm not going to fool myself that the majority of fans care in any sort of "beyond the story of the week" sense. No kid of mine will ever waste his brain playing football, and I'm sure that's true for plenty of kids out here - but then again, I'm not exactly a natural athlete, and the NFL and college football don't lack for participants. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:20 PM | #62 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
|
03-20-2013, 03:22 PM | #63 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Quote:
I think that spearing is just for defensive players. And yes, (Edit: intentionally) initiating contact with the crown of the helmet has been illegal for defensive players for some time, and I can count on one hand the amount of times I've seen it called. Last edited by sabotai : 03-20-2013 at 03:24 PM. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:23 PM | #64 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Quote:
I've cared steadily less for the NFL for at least a couple of decades. Would require more effort than I'm willing to expend to come up with a specific time frame. Would also be unfair to limit that declining interest solely to on-field concerns. The salary cap has done as much damage to my interest as anything, I'm consistently rankled by the very concept that players are routinely cut for reasons other than an owner being unwilling to pay them/that or they are simply no longer worth their contract.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
|
03-20-2013, 03:25 PM | #65 | ||
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
Quote:
Quote:
what set of rules is going to eliminate this? |
||
03-20-2013, 03:28 PM | #66 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
The federal rules of civil procedure are the ones the NFL is worried about. Football, like everything else in life, can never be 100% safe, but refusing to adjust anything about the rules with all the new science we have about the dangers of concussions invites legal problems. And is probably unethical. Last edited by molson : 03-20-2013 at 03:35 PM. |
03-20-2013, 03:29 PM | #67 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
|
Quote:
It would also cause some of these players to think twice about doing something dirty on defense if they had to face a similar situation in retaliation on the other side of the ball. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:36 PM | #68 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
|
03-20-2013, 03:41 PM | #69 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
The rule is designed to reduce legal exposure, and secondarily, to reduce the likelihood of an on-field death or paralysis and subsequent negative impact on their business. I mean, do you just not believe them? Do you just not believe that the NFL's high-priced legal teams have done the research and have scared them half to death with the risks? Do you think the NFL owners are just a bunch of over-protective mother-like figures who just care too much about their beloved players? Last edited by molson : 03-20-2013 at 03:43 PM. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:50 PM | #70 | |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
Quote:
lol. because when you're talking about hgh riddled gladiators in body armor hurling themselves at one another it's all about minimizing your legal exposure. itt: madness |
|
03-20-2013, 03:55 PM | #71 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
It is. Any industry that has the potential for carnage has to be deeply concerned about legal exposure. Airlines, car manufacturers, drug manufacturers, skydive instructors, public mass transportation authorities, construction companies, prison management - there's dangers in all that stuff and of course, absolutely, those involved in those industries better have plans in place to mitigate damage and legal exposure, even if they can't 100% eliminate the risk. Courts ask, "what could you have done differently?" Last edited by molson : 03-20-2013 at 03:58 PM. |
|
03-20-2013, 03:55 PM | #72 |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
When one lawsuit could cost them tens of millions of dollars, if not a whole heck of a lot more, yeah...its something they have to think about.
|
03-20-2013, 03:58 PM | #73 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Appleton, WI
|
Quote:
It is illegal for the offense too. I have seen it called a few times in lower levels, mostly by referees that liked to enforce at least one obscure rule each game. Rather than making a new rule, why not just make a point of emphasis to use the existing rule? |
|
03-20-2013, 04:11 PM | #74 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
nothing. our sport as it was designed is inherently dangerous. this has been exacerbated by the evolution of athletes with modern training techniques. as such, we cannot continue to lie to our fans and to ourselves about the reality of our sport. we will seek admission with athletic commissions in the states with teams and going forward wish to be classified along with boxing and mma as a combat sport.
|
03-20-2013, 04:15 PM | #75 | |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
Quote:
Great...now about that time when you knew things were problematic and just waited for someone to die... |
|
03-20-2013, 04:16 PM | #76 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
MMA and boxing have rules promoting safety too. The UFC couldn't get licensed in most states until they were in place. (And once they were put in place, the popularity of the sport exploded, even though I'm sure there were plenty of old-timers who hated that they had to move away from the old days.) Last edited by molson : 03-20-2013 at 04:21 PM. |
|
03-20-2013, 04:26 PM | #77 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
this feels like a debate about the economy.
me: it's fucked. own it you: sure it's fucked. but we might be able to prop it up for 20 more years |
03-20-2013, 04:26 PM | #78 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
Quote:
Here's the rule you're talking about, part of 12.2.8 (Unnecessary Roughness) says: "If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily." Perhaps if Sak is around, he can clear up how that rule is specifically taught for officials. I'm trying to find the exact wording of the new rule, but can't find it. |
|
03-20-2013, 04:29 PM | #79 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
I don't think it's fucked at all, exactly because the league is smart enough to evolve in ways that impact its business 0%. |
|
03-20-2013, 04:53 PM | #80 | |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
this is pretty much how i feel. it's from grantland
Quote:
|
|
03-20-2013, 04:57 PM | #81 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Georgia
|
We can't do everything, so we should do nothing is always a terrible argument.
__________________
Top 10 Songs of the Year 1955-Present (1976 Added) Franchise Portfolio Draft Winner Fictional Character Draft Winner Television Family Draft Winner Build Your Own Hollywood Studio Draft Winner |
03-20-2013, 05:02 PM | #82 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
or classify yourself as a combat sport and put the onus of safety on the athletic commission
|
03-20-2013, 05:06 PM | #83 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
|
03-20-2013, 05:07 PM | #84 | |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
Quote:
Is that really something thats as simple as just saying "were a combat sport, were not liable anymore" and then you're ok in every state and on the federal level? That seems like it should be a fairly complicated process for a currently running league. |
|
03-20-2013, 05:25 PM | #85 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
is it better to have something or nothing? i'm proposing something. you're proposing a smoldering crater where football used to be
these rules changes are a farce. |
03-20-2013, 05:33 PM | #86 |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
our definitions of "nothing" clearly differ.
|
03-20-2013, 05:37 PM | #87 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Quote:
The NFL will never allow itself to be governed by state regulatory bodies.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
03-20-2013, 05:46 PM | #88 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Would you prefer that the NFL not have made these rules changes and we just continued on with the status quo - (helmet to helmet contact everywhere, guys going right back in after concussions), or would you rather play it safe for the preservation of the game and turn over rule authority right now to the government, so that tighter rules can be imposed, because they're doomed otherwise? Because I thought you were just in the "NFL is wussy, big hits rulz" crowd, but now you seem to be saying that they should go all in on the safety regulations immediately. |
03-20-2013, 06:53 PM | #89 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NYC
|
Pretty sure this is why Norv Turner couldn't succeed as a head coach.
|
03-20-2013, 08:30 PM | #90 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
the athletic commission/combat sports thing was spitball. i have no idea how to save football. if you think it's gonna be all arm tackles and space age helmets you're a silly person.
football is fucked. i give it even odds goodell lied to congress (knowingly or unknowingly) which will probably come out during the class action (if you've ever seen the 30 for 30 'broke' you know is a matter of when not if) whether that leads or follows the impending legal tsunami remains to be seen minimizing legal risk? that's nuts. it's like the romans saying, 'what if we de-clawed the lions before tossing them in with the christians?' the fundamental concept of your sport is violence. the lions are still gonna eat the christians and 250 lb men are still going to tackle 250 lb men Last edited by NorvTurnerOverdrive : 03-20-2013 at 08:37 PM. |
03-20-2013, 09:29 PM | #91 |
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
I dont even mean this as reducto de absurdum but then why not just go back to no helmets and no pads. If youre going to try and keep people safe shouldnt you actually try and keep them as safe as you realistically can? Also goalies wearing modern masks is a total pussification of hockey right?
Last edited by chadritt : 03-20-2013 at 09:29 PM. |
03-20-2013, 10:01 PM | #92 |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
won't matter. idk the exact data but i'd wager 95% of concussions in sports are impulsive (brain collides with skull interior) not impactive (skull interior bends/collapses into brain)
virtually all ko's in boxing/mma are impulsive (shot to the jaw, head snaps violently) the brain is just floating around in jelly up there. |
03-20-2013, 10:43 PM | #93 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY
|
Class action suits should entirely fail under one simple fact of law:
That participants knew the dangers going into the sport. I don't see how you can blame anyone or claim they are at fault when you willingly sign your kid up and send him off to play a game you KNOW to have this possible outcome. I don't get how the players got a payoff from the NFL for doing what they WANTED TO DO and demanded HIGH PAY to perform doing. How does that make it the league's fault that you got banged up? There is no danger to the NFL's existence. Anyone who thinks so is deluding themselves with how much difference any of this is going to make. 50-100 years from now barring some sort of sports revo/evo-lutions the NFL will still be going strong and we'll be discussing some other "new and horrible fact" about being an NFL professional. |
03-20-2013, 11:09 PM | #94 | |
College Benchwarmer
Join Date: Jan 2008
|
it would help if i read the f'n article. the lawsuit already exists. the outrage is that 'player safety' was never a concern until after it was filed (my bad if this is common knowledge. i blame the a.d.d.)
Quote:
OTL |
|
03-20-2013, 11:52 PM | #95 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
|
Quote:
You want to hitch your wagon to such time spans? I mean 50 years ago, the Super Bowl hadn't even begun and boxing was a big time sport.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams |
|
03-20-2013, 11:56 PM | #96 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Decatur, GA
|
Quote:
You mean expect for the lawsuit that was filed in January after it was shown Seau had CTE? I bet if Seau's family wins, it's back all over the newspapers. And there is nothing more that the media loves than bringing down things.
__________________
"A prayer for the wild at heart, kept in cages" -Tennessee Williams |
|
03-21-2013, 02:32 AM | #97 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2003
|
Quote:
In temrs of the public conversation though? Not really. I hope you're right Imran, but I sincerely doubt it. |
|
03-21-2013, 06:42 AM | #98 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Quote:
It isn't that simple. The lawsuit will be about proper monitoring of concussions, pressure to play before fully healed, lack of interest in research and preventive care, failure to heed warnings about concussions, etc. A lot of the issues are similar to the Big Tobacco lawsuits.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
03-21-2013, 11:52 AM | #99 |
Coordinator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY
|
No it really IS that simple, and it goes right along with the Big Tobacco shit too.
The players KNOW when they're hurting, they KNOW when something isn't right with thri body. You do not reach that level as an athlete without being intimately aware of your body and how it reacts to injury. Its the same BS with Tobacco. Why the fuck should anyone pay out billions of dollars because people are stupid enough to suck SMOKE into their LUNGS? They KNEW it was a bad thing to do yet they did it anyway. I am SO not impressed with giving cash prizes for unabated stupidity. EDIT: It comes down to being honest with yourself and being responsible for yourself. If you're JR Seau and you make teh decision to go back into a game when your brain is fucked up then you have to live (or die) with that decision. People should not reap benefits because you chose to endanger your own life in that way. The League certainly SHOULD take precautions, but in the end no one other than ourselves can protect us from ourselves. its not their job and should NOT become their job.
__________________
http://wotlabs.net/s...8/signature.png http://wotlabs.net/sig_dark/na/banichi18/signature.png Last edited by RendeR : 03-21-2013 at 11:54 AM. |
03-21-2013, 12:01 PM | #100 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NYC
|
I agree with a lot of what you say. But you're talking about what should happen, and that's fine, but the NFL has to deal with the potential reality of what could happen or what would happen if they try to adopt the "you signed up for it, deal with it" defense.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|