BB's take on new "helmet rule"

[Tunescribe]

Link: Bill Belichick Understands, Doesn’t Seemed Bothered By New Helmet Rule

This reaction from BB surprised me yet didn't at the same time. I'm going to try and look at this rule his way vs. letting it bug the hell out of me as it has so far.

 

[Guts]

Its a stupid rule and I have a feeling some teams are going to get screwed over by it in a critical moment of a game

 

[Deus Irae]

The rule is unworkable. BB knows that. He's seen it on film. The NFL comes down on coaches who speak out during implementations. We've seen this before. BB's true take? Good luck finding that right now.

“There’s examples where everybody has been called — blockers, guys defeating blocks, more tacklers, but also some runners,” Belichick said. “I think these are problems and questions that really should go to the NFL officiating department. It doesn’t matter whether I like the rule or don’t like the rule or what I think the rule should or should be or should or shouldn’t be called. That’s not my job. My job is to understand the rule and to coach it.

 

[catent]

I like the rule. Yes, it's going to fundamentally change the way certain players have to play the game to be within the rules but I don't think that's a bad thing by any means.

Legislating out particularly reckless/dangerous/high risk plays is common in many sports, football is catching up with the times.

I acknowledge that some dipping of the helmet is natural but it's not a black and white issue. Legislating out the majority of intentional and egregious versions of leading with the helmet is, in principle, a good thing in my opinion, and erring on the side of being liberal in that interpretation may frustrate fans but it's the best way to enact quick and meaningful change in how the game is played.

I hope there's some balance struck. It may need some tweaking but I like the first step.

 

[Deus Irae]

I acknowledge that some dipping of the helmet is natural but it's not a black and white issue.

Of course it's a black and white issue. You literally cannot lower your frame without dipping your helmet and not put yourself in imminent risk of massive injury. It's physiology.

 

[maineman209]

some teams are going to get screwed over by it in a critical moment of a game

No doubt. But it will be more in how the rule is interpreted and enforced by different refs, rather than the rule itself.

And I suspect that the Pats will benefit from those calls more often than they're hurt by them.

 

[DarrylS]

The public personna of BB is much different than the private one.. he is smarter than to speak out against the NFL as Goodell is looking for any opportunity to mess with him and the Pats... Goodell tried to get rid of him in Deflategate and when that backfired he went after the next best thing.

In private there are probably much different conversations..

 

[maineman209]

Link: Bill Belichick Understands, Doesn’t Seemed Bothered By New Helmet Rule

This reaction from BB surprised me yet didn't at the same time. I'm going to try and look at this rule his way vs. letting it bug the hell out of me as it has so far.

I expected BB to "not be bothered" by the rule itself. As he said (and has said for years), he's always exclusively taught/coached tackling technique that does NOT violate this new league rule. In a sense, it's already been a "rule" for his players for years, decades. He's even chewed out Pats players who have consistently violated his rule on this (looking at YOU, Mr. Big Bang Clock).

In that sense, Pats players SHOULD be flagged less often than players on other teams who have been coached with a less disciplined approach.

However, BB did NOT say that he's always going to be happy with how the rule is interpreted/enforced by individual officials. He pre-emptively deflected questions about that to Riveron and the league office.

 

[Tony2046]

I like the rule. Yes, it's going to fundamentally change the way certain players have to play the game to be within the rules but I don't think that's a bad thing by any means.

Legislating out particularly reckless/dangerous/high risk plays is common in many sports, football is catching up with the times.

I acknowledge that some dipping of the helmet is natural but it's not a black and white issue. Legislating out the majority of intentional and egregious versions of leading with the helmet is, in principle, a good thing in my opinion, and erring on the side of being liberal in that interpretation may frustrate fans but it's the best way to enact quick and meaningful change in how the game is played.

I hope there's some balance struck. It may need some tweaking but I like the first step.

It's a horrible first step.


FLAG!! Green player failed to clearly say, "EXCUSE ME" or "WATCH OUT" prior to contact.

 

[maineman209]

The public personna of BB is much different than the private one.. he is smarter than to speak out against the NFL as Goodell is looking for any opportunity to mess with him and the Pats... Goodell tried to get rid of him in Deflategate and when that backfired he went after the next best thing.

In private there are probably much different conversations..

Goodell didn't want Kraft to hire BB in the first place, because BB isn't "media friendly". BB and Goodell are mortal enemies because BB doesn't put up with la-de-da bullsh it, and Goodell embraces it.

 

[DarrylS]

Goodell didn't want Kraft to hire BB in the first place, because BB isn't "media friendly". BB and Goodell are mortal enemies because BB doesn't put up with la-de-da bullsh it, and Goodell embraces it.

Gruden as do most of the big name football "experts" love John Gruden, who never met a microphone he did not like..

 

[Froob]

Its a stupid rule and I have a feeling some teams are going to get screwed over by it in a critical moment of a game

It'll only be one team if that first team is the Ravens.

 

[Sicilian]

I don't think we get 100% of BB's feelings on the rule in this quote (or any quote of his on anything really), but I agree with Maineman that this isn't a huge departure from how he's been coaching football his entire life. I don't think the rule is as disastrous as most, I think players will adapt assuming some consistency can be established, which may take time and further adjustments. But if you say, "We don't know how to do X without doing Y, so let's change nothing," you'll never get anywhere. Take the data you see from the early enforcement of the rule, and adjust what doesn't work, but start somewhere if you think a change needs to be made for safety. I think people get way too sensitive about this stuff.

 

[long distance]

 

[Kontradiction]

I guarantee you he thinks its a ridiculous rule in private. Once the games start getting impacted by it and more people begin to tune out, the NFL will either have to stick with it and effectively ruin the game of football or walk it back.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Goodell didn't want Kraft to hire BB in the first place, because BB isn't "media friendly". BB and Goodell are mortal enemies because BB doesn't put up with la-de-da bullsh it, and Goodell embraces it.

Actually it was because Kraft "stole" BB from Goodell's beloved Jets. The league forced the Pats to cough up a 1st round round draft pick ( and a 4th and a 7th inexchange for BB and a 5th and 7th). I guarantee that if BB were coaching the Jets none of his crap from the last 11 years would ever have happened....

 

[Clonamery]

Goodell didn't want Kraft to hire BB in the first place, because BB isn't "media friendly". BB and Goodell are mortal enemies because BB doesn't put up with la-de-da bullsh it, and Goodell embraces it.

Plus, he spurned Goodell's team.....

 

[doesntmatter1]

The rule goes too far but I see what the league is trying to do. I actually expect to see more fumbles because high speed body shots without the use of the head actually seem to have more force.

eg. the Ryan Lewis hit that folded that Redskin player in the first game is going to be more common.

 

[MassPats38]

I guarantee you he thinks its a ridiculous rule in private. Once the games start getting impacted by it and more people begin to tune out, the NFL will either have to stick with it and effectively ruin the game of football or walk it back.

Once a rule governing play is more than a proposed rule change, I cannot recall BB publicly trashing it. He accepts it, trains as best as he can to avoid crossing it, and attempts to gain competitive advantage by exploiting it when possible.

Coaches and players complaining won't help (see all the fines two or three years ago for unnecessary roughness). It would take major mistakes and fan revolt (ratings decline) to move the owners to change it. The problem with these safety rules is they probably cannot simply eliminate them because of the concussion issues. That means a series of annoying tweaks, much like the catch rule.

 

[maineman209]

Actually it was because Kraft "stole" BB from Goodell's beloved Jets. The league forced the Pats to cough up a 1st round round draft pick ( and a 4th and a 7th inexchange for BB and a 5th and 7th). I guarantee that if BB were coaching the Jets none of his crap from the last 11 years would ever have happened....

Actually, IIRC, the "not media friendly" thing may have come up in a meeting between Kraft and a bunch of TV execs after the 1996 season, back when Goodell was still assistant to Lamar Hunt (president of the AFC at the time). Apparently, Kraft had been considering, perhaps briefly, promoting BB to HC (before he hired Pete Carroll) in the wake of Parcells jumping ship for the Jete. It may also have come up after BB resigned as HC of the Jete.

The point is that Goodell had disliked Belichick for awhile before Kraft finally made BB his HC, although Goodell didn't have the power to do anything about it until he was voted in as Commish in 2006. Issues between them that ultimately led to "Spygate" began to happen almost immediately thereafter.