Upcoming Rule Changes...

[alifeincomplete]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

I think it's an odd choice to make -- particularly the arbitrary tackle box distinction -- but I have no issue with making the game safer. I'm under no delusions that there's some secret agenda afoot nor do I fall for the hyperbole that football is being "ruined" and "next they'll eliminate tackles!!!one!"

[mestevo]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

The fact that the rule ignores the tackle box is almost an admission that this type of running is needed in the game of football. If we're so concerned about player safety why not enforce it there as well. Players can get enough steam up to wallop each other in there too

No, it's because of all the different ways it happens in that area of the field that they'd have to enact a bunch of rules to mitigate - not just this one. Or for consistency and safety do you want no defenders leaving their feet on goal line stands, mandate balanced lines on both sides of the ball (hat on a hat, but not the crown of your hat!), penalize OL and DL who don't know the angle each player is going to take for hitting helmets? While we're at it, maybe no hands on the ground anymore?

So yeah, if you want an unenforceable rule make it apply to the tackle box and there would have to be a litany of other rules that would completely change the game at the line of scrimmage. Instead, the old spearing rule just applies to everyone outside the tackle box now rather than just tacklers.

[coogrfan]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

Rich McKay says NFL studied Week 10 and Week 16 from 2012; there would have been 11 flags under the new helmet rule during those two weeks.

While there may well have been only 11 situations in those two weeks that would have warranted a penalty if the helmet rule had been in place, I'm fairly certain that given the refs standard policy of "when in doubt, call it" there would have been a lot more than 11 flags thrown. This thing has the potential to be an utter farce.

[Segagendude]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

I'm becoming more of a hockey fan every day....

[SteelerSpartan]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

No, it's because of all the different ways it happens in that area of the field that they'd have to enact a bunch of rules to mitigate - not just this one. Or for consistency and safety do you want no defenders leaving their feet on goal line stands, mandate balanced lines on both sides of the ball (hat on a hat, but not the crown of your hat!), penalize OL and DL who don't know the angle each player is going to take for hitting helmets? While we're at it, maybe no hands on the ground anymore?

So yeah, if you want an unenforceable rule make it apply to the tackle box and there would have to be a litany of other rules that would completely change the game at the line of scrimmage. Instead, the old spearing rule just applies to everyone outside the tackle box now rather than just tacklers.

No I don't want any of this bullsh**....because there are complicated dynamics that exist outside the box too....thats going to make this rule a cluster**** to referee as well

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1r3yuWcd6zk" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

^^that Hit on the Packer is going to get a flag way more then it should.....The refs aren't going to be to able to tell if the point of impact is precisely on the crown or just off to the front side......

Instead of judging the hit on that criteria they're going to make snap decisions based on how violently the RB ducks and attacks the defender....coupled with the resulting outcome on the defender....i.e.. "ooh the defender got hurt and humiliated....that most have been one right"

Some might say look at the very 1st hit where Jacobs trucks the redskin...why can't running backs just try an power through that way???......

I wouldn't want my RBs constantly letting the other defenders get lower then them, giving up leverage, and getting hit like that.....Jacobs got away with it because of his size......this isn't a good option for a lot of other backs if they want to hold their own in a collision like that

[ghettogeeksta]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

No I don't want any of this bullsh**....because there are complicated dynamics that exist outside the box too....thats going to make this rule a cluster**** to referee as well

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1r3yuWcd6zk" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>

^^that Hit on the Packer is going to get a flag way more then it should.....The refs aren't going to be to able to tell if the point of impact is precisely on the crown or just off to the front side......

Instead of judging the hit on that criteria they're going to make snap decisions based on how violently the RB ducks and attacks the defender....coupled with the resulting outcome on the defender....i.e.. "ooh the defender got hurt and humiliated....that most have been one right"

Some might say look at the very 1st hit where Jacobs trucks the redskin...why can't running backs just try an power through that way???......

I wouldn't want my RBs constantly letting the other defenders get lower then them, giving up leverage, and getting hit like that.....Jacobs got away with it because of his size......this isn't a good option for a lot of other backs if they want to hold their own in a collision like that

I completely agree, there is a infinite amount of variables, the refs are just going to make these calls based on the way it looks, not what actually happened.

[ghettogeeksta]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

Ive already thought of an exploit, its called sacrifice defender. If you are in the open field and a back is coming right at you, don't go low, attempt a high tackle and let the back ram into you to draw a flag.

[SteelerSpartan]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

Ive already thought of an exploit, its called sacrifice defender. If you are in the open field and a back is coming right at you, don't go low, attempt a high tackle and let the back ram into you to draw a flag.

The NFL version of "The Flop"

[wwharton]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

From Mike Brown:

Wow, I agree with Mike Brown.

[trobinson97]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

I guess there will be no more of this.

Or this



Some calling it "T-Rich rule".

A video of Richardson knocking off Eagles safety Kurt Coleman's helmet was used as an example of plays the league wanted to penalize during the NFL owners meetings in Phoenix. The rule change passed 31-1, with the Cincinnati Bengals the only team to vote against it.

"I feel like I made it bad for all the backs," Richardson told the newspaper. "I feel like it's my fault."

He said people are starting to name the rule after him.

"People keep telling me it's the T-Rich rule," he said. "I guess I made history today."

[ghettogeeksta]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

A 15 yard penalty is one thing but taking away first downs and TD's because of this rule is not going to go over well with the fans, especially on bad calls. I can just see it, a team is down 3pts on the 20 yd line with 1min to go on the clock. A Running back draw up the middle, he breaks the tackle box, only the safety is between the back and the goal line, the back lowers the boom on the safety and plows into the end zone TOUCHDOWN!!!!!!!

No wait, its a PENALTY, the TD has been reneged because the running back hit the safety with the crown of his helmet Game over the other team wins!!!

[mestevo]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

A 15 yard penalty is one thing but taking away first downs and TD's because of this rule is not going to go over well with the fans, especially on bad calls. I can just see it, a team is down 3pts on the 20 yd line with 1min to go on the clock. A Running back draw up the middle, he breaks the tackle box, only the safety is between the back and the goal line, the back lowers the boom on the safety and plows into the end zone TOUCHDOWN!!!!!!!

No wait, its a PENALTY, the TD has been reneged because the running back hit the safety with the crown of his helmet Game over the other team wins!!!

That running back would be an idiot, as would the rest of the team for letting time somehow expire with a minute to go down 3 on the 20. RBs can still go through people, they just can't T-Rich them. If you have a hard time understanding that watch the Brandon Jacobs video, after watching it once I don't think it would have been called on a single run yet he still he plows through a couple people.

You're not watching football anymore anyways, so what's it matter?

[slickdtc]

I read Jeff Fisher as saying it's an attempt to bring the shoulder back into the game, that they know the head lowers with the shoulders, and refs are inclined to be judicious with calling this penalty.

Hyperbole abound, though. It's hard to read some of these threads. Talk about an overreaction. Ruining football? Boycott watching it? Yeah okay.

[cjonesfan921]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

If you can't see how what Richardson did there is unsafe, I don't know what to say.

I love football. It is a passion of mine, like most of you. I appreciate everything these guys leave on the field. However, I also have come to realize that this game punishes their body.

I compare it to wrestling and seeing how some of those guys look like after their careers. Anything that can make the game(or anything) a tad bit safer, I am for. I will still watch and be entertained.

[coogrfan]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

That running back would be an idiot, as would the rest of the team for letting time somehow expire with a minute to go down 3 on the 20. RBs can still go through people, they just can't T-Rich them. If you have a hard time understanding that watch the Brandon Jacobs video, after watching it once I don't think it would have been called on a single run yet he still he plows through a couple people.

You have a lot more faith in the officials than I do. Given the number of phantom roughing the qb and illegal hit on a defenseless receiver penalties we see every sunday, what reason is there to believe the refs won't go overboard with this as well?