Upcoming Rule Changes...

[JasonWilliams55]

New NFL rule would bar helmet hits by the rusher

Source

A rule proposed by the NFL’s competition committee would make it a foul for a ball carrier to smash into a defender with the crown of his helmet in open space.

It would be the first rule in American football history limiting a runner’s contact with a defender, outside of egregious acts such as punching a tackler, or grabbing his facemask while stiff-arming.

Owners vote next Wednesday at the league’s annual meeting in Phoenix on whether to approve this and five other proposed new rules, announced Thursday by the competition committee on a conference call with NFL writers.

Sure to be the most controversial of the six proposed changes is the runner-contact rule. It reads:

“It is a foul if a runner or tackler initiates forcible contact by delivering a blow with the top crown of his helmet against an opponent when both players are clearly outside of the tackle box. Incidental contact by the helmet of a runner or tackler against an opponent shall not be a foul.”

Emmitt Smith Says New Safety Rule Means NFL Has “Lost Its Mind”

Source

The NFL is changing its rules to prevent ball-carriers from initiating contact with the crown of the helmet.

It’s an attempt to make the game safer – but the league’s all-time leading rusher, Emmitt Smith, thinks the NFL should have its own head examined.
“If I’m a running back and I’m running into a linebacker, you’re telling me I have to keep my head up so he can take my chin off?’’ Smith said Thursday in an exclusive interview with Dallas radio station 105.3 The Fan. “You’ve absolutely lost your mind.’’

“As a running back, it’s almost impossible (to not lower your head),’’ said the Dallas Cowboys legend. “The first thing you do is get behind your shoulder pads. That means you’re leaning forward and the first part of contact that’s going to take place is your head, regardless.

“I disagree with the rule altogether. It doesn’t make any sense for that position. It sounds like it’s been made up by people who have never played the game of football.’’

Now I personally don't think this will get 24 of the 32 owner votes that it needs to pass, but, it kinda shows which direction the powers that control the NFL are wanting to take the game, to make it even more nanny-fied than its become already.

I have already cut my NFL watching time down significantly and if this passes, I will pass on the NFL all together.

Did not see this posted here yet, so have at it OS.

[JasonWilliams55]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

NFL rule changes: Tuck rule among proposed changes

Source

The NFL tuck rule could be no more if a proposal by the NFL Competition Committee is approved during the annual league meetings.

A change to the tuck rule was one of six rule change proposals announced by the Competition Committee on Thursday. If the proposal is accepted, the new rule would result in a fumble on any play where the quarterback loses the ball while in the process of moving it back to his body after a pump fake. The proposed change is not unexpected, as Dean Blandino, the NFL director of officiating said in January the league would look into changing the rule.

The other proposals include a change to the so called "Jim Schwartz rule." Currently, if a NFL coach challenges a play illegally, the play is no longer reviewable as Schwartz infamously found out during a Thanksgiving Day game. Under the proposed change, a team would lose a timeout for an illegal challenge, but the play could still be reviewed.

That wasn't the only proposed change to the instant replay system, as another proposal would make an incomplete pass reviewable through a fumble. Currently, if a pass is ruled incomplete on the field, the play is deemed dead and is not reviewable. The change would allow officials to review whether the pass was incomplete or complete with a fumble and recovery.

There were also proposals to improve player safety. One change would make the long snapper on extra point and field goal attempts a defenseless player in an effort to reduce injuries. The Competition Committee also proposed a ban on peel-back blocks, even inside the tackle box. That would eliminate cut blocks and other low blocks. Under another proposal, players would be prevented striking other players with their helmet outside of the tackle box. That rule change is designed for running backs who use the crown of their helmet against defenders.

A number of bylaw changes were also proposed, including changing the window for players to return from the physically unable to perform list from Week 6 to Week 11. The final preseason cut list could also be changed to accommodate a potential Wednesday season opener.

As expected, the NFL did not propose a change to expand the playoffs to 14 or even 16 teams. Playoff expansion was reportedly discussed, but the Competition Committee did not rule either way.

Some more of the potential rule changes being discussed amongst the NFL, Competition Committee and the Owners.

[mestevo]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

The RB rule doesn't sound as bad as the headline did when I first read it. It's for outside the tackle box, so one on one vs a defender or two you can't lower your helmet and go through them.

Can only imagine the fan reaction if that goes into effect and starts getting called a couple of times per game.



Have to say I didn't expect the 'im done watching the NFL' threats in the very first post, hilarious.

Here's a more concise recap of what is being proposed, via PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...bylaw-changes/

Proposed rule changes

1. A play that would have been automatically reviewed by instant replay will still be reviewed even if a coach throws his challenge flag. Any coach who challenges a play that he’s not permitted to challenge would be charged a timeout, and wouldn’t get his timeout back even if he wins the challenge, or would lose 15 yards if his team is out of timeouts. But the play itself will still be reviewed. Call this the Jim Schwartz Rule. The league will also consider reviewing incomplete passes that are ruled a fumble all the way through the fumble — if a play is ruled on the field to be incomplete and overturned on replay as a fumble, the replay can consider everything that happens after that fumble.

2. Player safety: On field goals and extra points, restrictions are added to what rush teams can do. No more than six defensive players would be permitted to align on either side of the snapper, defensive players can’t push their teammates across the line, and the long snapper is considered a defenseless player.

3. Eliminate the tuck rule.

4. Allow tight ends and H-backs to wear 40-49.

5. Player safety: Offensive players will not be allowed to block low when going toward their own end lines in the tackle box. Can’t go low when peeling back anywhere on the field.

6. Player safety: Initiating contact with the crown of the helmet is a foul if the runner or tackler delivers a forceable blow against his opponent when both players are outside the tackle box.

Proposed bylaw changes

1. The waiver period will be such that a team that claims a player only needs to keep him for one day, not two days.

2. Adjust the physically unable to perform status to allow players on PUP to practice for any three-week period from Week Six through Week 11.

3. Move the final roster cutdown date one day earlier.

New points of emphasis

1. Mandatory thigh and knee pads. This isn’t a new rule but the officials will start actively enforcing the rule, rather than just urging players to wear the pads as they did last year. A player who refuses to comply with the rule won’t be allowed on the field.

2. Fields must be maintained up to NFL standards, and the league can require clubs to maintain their fields up to the league’s high standards, at the club’s expense.

[coogrfan]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

The RB rule doesn't sound as bad as the headline did when I first read it. It's for outside the tackle box, so one on one vs a defender or two you can't lower your helmet and go through them

[jmood88]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

It's ridiculous that it wasn't called in the first place, especially when defenders get penalized for looking at the ball carrier wrong.

[mestevo]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

The rule also removes helmet to helmet hits on runners that previously wasn't covered since it's all hits that involve initiating contact using the crown of your helmet outside of the tackle box, rather than hits specific to defenseless players.

[sycodmn]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

I think that run in the gif would be inside the tackle box, so...

Of course, clotheslines and stick'em used to be allowed in the seventies too, are we mad about that?

[wwharton]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

As the rule is written it applies only to the ball carrier? So, the mistake most fans make is assuming a defender should be penalized when leading with his helmet on a ball carrier... that's not a foul. According to this, it'd still not be a foul, but the ball carrier lowering his helmet would be. Not to mention a runner GRABBING a facemask is still legal.

I want to think these people in charge are smarter than us but they make it difficult sometimes.

[kcharles520]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

umm so basically the NFL wants to ban trucking by running backs....so much for the power run game if this rule gets passed.

might as well draft a 5'10 180 pound twig to be your starting tailback. what's the point of having a 220 pound halfback if he can't lower his head and run anyone over??? unreal....

[SPTO]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

I hope like hell the tuck rule gets overturned because that's the most ridiculous "star" rule i've ever seen the league implement. It's made judging whether it's an attempted pass or fumble far more difficult than it should be.

I also think that runner contact rule might not make it but the voting will be very close.

[kehlis]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

umm so basically the NFL wants to ban trucking by running backs....so much for the power run game if this rule gets passed.

might as well draft a 5'10 180 pound twig to be your starting tailback. what's the point of having a 220lb halfback if he can't lower his head and run anyone over??? unreal....

Because the rule is only in affect outside of the tackle box....

[kcharles520]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

Because the rule is only in affect outside of the tackle box....

it's still a terrible rule because now instead of just reacting on instinct a runner will have to think "oh am i in a spot on the field where i can lower my head without a penalty?"

it could ultimately cause more head/neck injuries due to players awkwardly "half-trucking" because they're unsure if they're outside the tackle box or not, especially on off-tackle running plays.

it's just a dumb rule and the tackle box thing makes it even more confusing.

[kehlis]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

it's still a terrible rule because now instead of just reacting on instinct a runner will have to think "oh am i in a spot on the field where i can lower my head without a penalty?"

it could ultimately cause more head/neck injuries due to players awkwardly "half-trucking" because they're unsure if they're outside the tackle box or not, especially on off-tackle running plays.

it's just a dumb rule and the tackle box thing makes it even more confusing.

I wasn't agreeing with the rule. I was telling you why you why there is still a need for a power back.

[jmood88]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

it's still a terrible rule because now instead of just reacting on instinct a runner will have to think "oh am i in a spot on the field where i can lower my head without a penalty?"

it could ultimately cause more head/neck injuries due to players awkwardly "half-trucking" because they're unsure if they're outside the tackle box or not, especially on off-tackle running plays.

it's just a dumb rule and the tackle box thing makes it even more confusing.

That's not going to happen. Players will keep doing the same things they do until the coaches get tired of it and get them to stop or deal with the occasional penalty. It's against the rules for defenders to throw themselves at ball carriers but they keep on doing it.

[kcharles520]

Re: Upcoming Rule Changes...

That's not going to happen. Players will keep doing the same things they do until the coaches get tired of it and get them to stop or deal with the occasional penalty. It's against the rules for defenders to throw themselves at ball carriers but they keep on doing it.

you're right that backs will prolly continue to do this despite the rule. halfbacks lower their head to take on a defenders, ala Adrian Peterson pretty frequently it seems. you definitely see more halfback trucks in the average football game than safeties launching themselves into the helmet of defenseless receivers lol, even before they had these rules.

trucking is a natural part of football....launching yourself into a defenseless dude's head is just calculated brutality. i definitely agree with the defensive rules on helmet to helmet but these running back rules are just taking it too far...

i really hope this gets voted down but i doubt it will.