The disgusting attacks on Gronk

[Kontradiction]

I'm beginning to wonder how many people in here have ever played football competitively in their lives. Smaller DB's and LB's have been trained to go low on bigger TE's since the advent of the game. This is not going to change.

 

[upstater1]

Leading with your helmet and launching yourself at a player is not a tackle in my book.

People can blame league officials for rule changes etc. but the simple fact is most players have no ****ing clue how to tackle preferring to hit a player instead. A secondary notion is I'm damn well sure if the players tackled properly, the instances of concussion would probably decrease.

Spoken like a true Aussie. I agree. People don't seem to understand you can wrap people up. They'd rather blow people up.

 

[Galeb]

I'm beginning to wonder how many people in here have ever played football competitively in their lives. Smaller DB's and LB's have been trained to go low on bigger TE's since the advent of the game. This is not going to change.

Wrapping up low is a lot different than launching at someone's knees. I was 180 when I played and had little difficulty doing form tackles on 230+ runners. Those launching tackles are only good for those who play with fear or those who don't have enough leverage to play the game properly.

 

[Big-T]

There's no problem in going low, that's how you stop someone so big running at full speed (at 6'8" and having played Rugby all my life, people who try tackling at chest height just get bounced off 99% of the time). The problem is missiling into a players knee on his planted leg - that is outright dirty and only done to cause injury.

The bigger thing though is the Bills, once again, got called for diving at Brady's knee - that's at least 3 times in the last 3 years that has happened, way past coincidence now.

 

[Galeb]

There's no problem in going low, that's how you stop someone so big running at full speed (at 6'8" and having played Rugby all my life, people who try tackling at chest height just get bounced off 99% of the time). The problem is missiling into a players knee on his planted leg - that is outright dirty and only done to cause injury.

The bigger thing though is the Bills, once again, got called for diving at Brady's knee - that's at least 3 times in the last 3 years that has happened, way past coincidence now.

I haven't seen anyone say that tackling should be done at chest height.

 

[Kontradiction]

Wrapping up low is a lot different than launching at someone's knees. I was 180 when I played and had little difficulty doing form tackles on 230+ runners. Those launching tackles are only good for those who play with fear or those who don't have enough leverage to play the game properly.

Sometimes the game happens too quickly to make a wrap up form tackle and you have to launch. It's either that, or your ass goes to the bench because the coach thinks that you were trying to make an arm tackle on a taller, heavier target and said target breaks away for another 10-15 yards. I think it's a combination of that and some of these pee wee and high school coaches simply not caring enough to teach proper tackling. Either way, a lot of times, there is nothing inherently "disgusting" or "dirty" about it. It's just the way the game is played. Chandler took some similar shots on Sunday. I don't see anybody calling for McCourty's head.

 

[Kontradiction]

There's no problem in going low, that's how you stop someone so big running at full speed (at 6'8" and having played Rugby all my life, people who try tackling at chest height just get bounced off 99% of the time). The problem is missiling into a players knee on his planted leg - that is outright dirty and only done to cause injury.

The bigger thing though is the Bills, once again, got called for diving at Brady's knee - that's at least 3 times in the last 3 years that has happened, way past coincidence now.

Yeah. Hughes should get fined for that. If you want filthy, that's a very good example of it right there.

 

[ausbacker]

Spoken like a true Aussie. I agree. People don't seem to understand you can wrap people up. They'd rather blow people up.

It's nonsensical @upstater1. It would never occur to me to hit someone with my head when I could use proper technique to bring down my opponent and protect myself in the process.

 

[jays52]

They're always going to try to cut Gronk. It's the same reason Brian Leonard's college film was full of hurdles. Defensive players aren't going to go for a wrap up on a downhill runner, get croaked on the hit and potentially get run over while almost certainly give up yardage. It isn't rugby. Every yard matters and a cut tackle is the best way to bring down physical guys. It's on the runner to protect himself.

 

[Galeb]

Sometimes the game happens too quickly to make a wrap up form tackle and you have to launch. It's either that, or your ass goes to the bench because the coach thinks that you were trying to make an arm tackle on a taller, heavier target and said target breaks away for another 10-15 yards. I think it's a combination of that and some of these pee wee and high school coaches simply not caring enough to teach proper tackling. Either way, a lot of times, there is nothing inherently "disgusting" or "dirty" about it. It's just the way the game is played. Chandler took some similar shots on Sunday. I don't see anybody calling for McCourty's head.

In most cases, if you have time to launch, you have time to wrap up. When you get used to wrapping and attacking somebody's center of gravity, it becomes second nature. Once you reach that point, you have enough mental cycles free to focus on the "little things" like trying to dislodge the ball.

 

[letekro]

By using textbook tackling. You attack the center of gravity (the waist) and wrap up tightly. Even if you don't take him down, you slow him up enough that other players will finish him off.

The objective is to get the offensive player on the ground quickly and legally. It is beyond me how you can criticize a player for doing this.

 

[Galeb]

They're always going to try to cut Gronk. It's the same reason Brian Leonard's college film was full of hurdles. Defensive players aren't going to go for a wrap up on a downhill runner, get croaked on the hit and potentially get run over while almost certainly give up yardage. It isn't rugby. Every yard matters and a cut tackle is the best way to bring down physical guys. It's on the runner to protect himself.

I rarely disagree with you, but I do here. A cut tackle has a much bigger chance of completely whiffing. If you practice good form tackling and are not scared, you'll almost never get run over. I suppose cut tackles are more effective for players who can't control their fear or do not have the required leverage to play the game. I would prefer those types of people not play than have the massive numbers of serious injuries that plague NFL, college and high school football.

 

[Big-T]

I haven't seen anyone say that tackling should be done at chest height.

It's more common in Rugby because you need to cover the ball up to stop it being offloaded. You don't see players lateral the ball much on Football so just wrap up around the hips/thigh is good enough to take down or at least slow down a player so someone else can finish the tackle off.

 

[Galeb]

The objective is to get the offensive player on the ground quickly and legally. It is beyond me how you can criticize a player for doing this.

A more fundamental objective exists within good people; don't try to injure others. This type of thing shouldn't have to be explained to normal people (with character...lol).

 

[Kontradiction]

In most cases, if you have time to launch, you have time to wrap up. When you get used to wrapping and attacking somebody's center of gravity, it becomes second nature. Once you reach that point, you have enough mental cycles free to focus on the "little things" like trying to dislodge the ball.

You're letting emotion come too far into play here and it's affecting your argument. Your first sentence is not always true, as the Ward hit should have taught you. If you're using proper tackling technique to form your argument, the proper technique typically requires that you wrap up and then use your legs to drive through the tackle. If you're flying through the air trying to wrap up, that's an arm tackle. If you're advocating that smaller DB's try to arm tackle guys like Gronk, you're advocating that they get benched.

 

[jays52]

I rarely disagree with you, but I do here. A cut tackle has a much bigger chance of completely whiffing. If you practice good form tackling and are not scared, you'll almost never get run over. I suppose cut tackles are more effective for players who can't control their fear or do not have the required leverage to play the game. I would prefer those types of people not play than have the massive numbers of serious injuries that plague NFL, college and high school football.

That's totally fair, man. However, I think that given the speed of the game at the NFL level and the pursuit angles associated with spread offenses breaking down isn't an option. Other than screens or hitches its very, very rare that we see a player break down in the NFL anymore. I agree that going for a secure wrap is the most likely way to get a clean tackle on the ball carrier but only when it's an option.

 

[primetime]

How does Graham manage to rarely get hurt? He's a similar sized body.

Luck? Graham had issues with his ankles last year. He also doesn't fight as much for extra yards like Gronk does. Every time I see Gronk get wrapped up and keep moving forward I just wait with a grimace for someone to come barreling into the side of his knee.

 

[Brady2Gronk]

Graham is hurt right now with a shoulder injury.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

I'm beginning to wonder how many people in here have ever played football competitively in their lives. Smaller DB's and LB's have been trained to go low on bigger TE's since the advent of the game. This is not going to change.

I doubt many from the sound of it. I played linebacker at 230 3o years ago and there were backs I didn't want to take straight on because I knew it was going to be a train wreck. I didn't shy away but you only hoped you gave as good as you got because there were times I thought I broke something. If I were a db, I'd go low too. Form tackling can only take you so far. You don't want to take Gronk on when you're giving 100 pounds. lol

I remember there was one of those alumni football games back in my high school and they convinced a guy I knew to come back and play while he was still in college. He was at a top 10 division 1 school playing fullback at the time. Well, someone ex high school star thought they were going to show how they "still had it" and when the fullback came through the line, the ex high school star squared up and took the college fullback on. Well, it took a couple of surgeries to put his shoulder back together and the fullback realized that he shouldn't be there and went back to school the next day. lol

 

[letekro]

A more fundamental objective exists within good people; don't try to injure others. This type of thing shouldn't have to be explained to normal people (with character...lol).

The flaw in your reasoning is that your are equating going low with intending to injure. Since people started playing football, smaller players have been going low on bigger players. I never heard any complaints about this. All the sudden, our key guy gets hurt on a low hit, and now it is a dirty tactic.