BB's take on new "helmet rule"

[Deus Irae]

I can't speak for everyone here, but for me it just doesn't feel as cut and dry "impossible" as many are making it out to be. I think they're currently calling it really ticky tacky to A) Send the message that this is going to be enforced and B) The refs are going to need some time to train themselves on what to look for and how to call it as well. They're not robots, that we can just program the new rules into and they're going to call it perfectly every time. We're going to see an adjustment period with any new rule, especially one that's happening in split second plays.

They put into place a rule which cannot possibly be enforced as written without ruining the game. I'm not sure why you people are trying to argue about that, as the league has already tacitly admitted that fact by exempting QB sneaks from the rule.

 

[Deus Irae]

And the league is already walking it back, while insisting it's not walking it back.

“The committee resolved that there will be no changes to the rule as approved by clubs this spring, which includes no additional use of instant replay,” Vincent said. “The committee also determined that inadvertent or incidental contact with the helmet and/or facemask is not a foul.”

NFL says no changes to helmet rule, no use of instant replay

Here’s the rule, as passed in March: “It is a foul if a player lowers his head to initiate and make contact with his helmet against an opponent.” Eight days ago, I suggested this addition to the rule: “Incidental contact by the player’s helmet with an opponent shall not be a foul.”

Today, the league adopted that language without actually adopting it. Because the league can’t actually adopt it without creating the impression that the league erred in March by not creating an incidental-contact exception in the first place.

“The committee also determined that inadvertent or incidental contact with the helmet and/or facemask is not a foul,” Vincent now says. Which necessarily means that the 21-word rule that makes no allowance for incidental contact has been changed.

NFL admits refuses to admit mistake while admitting mistake


It's still not enough, or anywhere near enough, but it's a start. Will those of you who were defending this abomination of a rule now admit that you were wrong?

 

[Kontradiction]

The players don’t like it either...

NFL players are just as upset about new tackling rule as everyone else - Yahoo Sports NFL players are just as upset about new tackling rule as everyone else — Yahoo Sports

 

[long distance]

nice bit on BB's managing rules, officiating & communication with league officiating
(there's a “helmet rule“ discussion at the beginning)

 

[Simpelton]

They put into place a rule which cannot possibly be enforced as written without ruining the game. I'm not sure why you people are trying to argue about that, as the league has already tacitly admitted that fact by exempting QB sneaks from the rule.

How many times in the last decade alone has the game been "COMPLETELY ROONED! ROONED I TELL YOU!"

Getting a little tired of this one. Sports change and evolve over time. It takes a lot more than one or two rules changes to ruin a sport like football.

If the sport evolves away from power strategies and in favor of pure skill, I for one could live with that.

Basketball had to make the same evolution a few decades ago, and it did not ROON basketball. Removing leading with the helmet will not ROON football either.

It's simply a matter of enforcing proper technique. A proper tackle is made with the shoulder, not the helmet. Leading with the helmet is a reckless technique that is actually more likely to injure both the tackler and the tackled than doing things the "right" way. It was that kind of hit that cost Brady a year in 2009. I'm very fine with seeing them gone.

of all the reasons to leaving a technique in place that is more likely to injure participants than its alternative, "that's the way we've always done it" is probably both the worst and the stupidest, as well as the most common.

If the coaches are forced to teach proper technique or their teams get penalized, who knows, after we all get used to the new rules, it might actually take some steps towards reducing the CTE epidemic that is the best candidate to actually ROON this sport, if anything is going to do so.

 

[Simpelton]

The players don’t like it either...

NFL players are just as upset about new tackling rule as everyone else - Yahoo Sports NFL players are just as upset about new tackling rule as everyone else — Yahoo Sports

Nobody likes having to relearn how to do their job. But I'd say reducing the incidence of head injuries in the NFL is a pretty good reason to get the **** over it and do your job.

If "your job" of the moment is relearning how to tackle, then get over yourself and do it.

The heck do the players think whining about it is going to accomplish? That's not their job. Their job is to play their position within the rules. Get to it, fellas!

 

[Deus Irae]

How many times in the last decade alone has the game been "COMPLETELY ROONED! ROONED I TELL YOU!"

Getting a little tired of this one.

I don't care that you're tired of it, and the league obviously doesn't either, since they've already walked the rule way the hell back.

But keep ranting, if that works for you.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Nobody likes having to relearn how to do their job. But I'd say reducing the incidence of head injuries in the NFL is a pretty good reason to get the **** over it and do your job.

If "your job" of the moment is relearning how to tackle, then get over yourself and do it.

The heck do the players think whining about it is going to accomplish? That's not their job. Their job is to play their position within the rules. Get to it, fellas!

Sorry but this doesn't make sense on so many levels.

Essentially you're saying to learn how to tackle w/out leading w your helmet. That's impossible. Ask coaches, new players, old players & they'll all tell you the same.

More impossible when you're going 1,000 mph w multiple bodies flying around. Some tryna hit you or vice versa.

I'd love a safer game but this isn't that. This is the owners covering their ass.

Sometimes there are two sides. 50/50, ya know?

At the same time sometimes someone is just 100% wrong. There is no other side.

This is one of those cases.

You could literally call it on every single play. On running backs lowering their head. Defensive ends looking to get leverage. LB's making a picture perfect, textbook tackle. Playing along the line for 1 game, either side, is the equivalent to 40-50 car crashes I believe.

That's the complete opposite of making the game safer. It's chaos. The league has no clue what their doing. So the refs will have no clue how to enforce it. And the players have no clue how to respond.


It's a lot more complicated than relearn this or get it together fellas.

 

[Kontradiction]

Nobody likes having to relearn how to do their job. But I'd say reducing the incidence of head injuries in the NFL is a pretty good reason to get the **** over it and do your job.

If "your job" of the moment is relearning how to tackle, then get over yourself and do it.

The heck do the players think whining about it is going to accomplish? That's not their job. Their job is to play their position within the rules. Get to it, fellas!

Thanks for the brutally bad take.

 

[1960Pats]

Sorry but this doesn't make sense on so many levels.

Essentially you're saying to learn how to tackle w/out leading w your helmet. That's impossible. Ask coaches, new players, old players & they'll all tell you the same.

More impossible when you're going 1,000 mph w multiple bodies flying around. Some tryna hit you or vice versa.

I'd love a safer game but this isn't that. This is the owners covering their ass.

Sometimes there are two sides. 50/50, ya know?

At the same time sometimes someone is just 100% wrong. There is no other side.

This is one of those cases.

You could literally call it on every single play. On running backs lowering their head. Defensive ends looking to get leverage. LB's making a picture perfect, textbook tackle. Playing along the line for 1 game, either side, is the equivalent to 40-50 car crashes I believe.

That's the complete opposite of making the game safer. It's chaos. The league has no clue what their doing. So the refs will have no clue how to enforce it. And the players have no clue how to respond.


It's a lot more complicated than relearn this or get it together fellas.

Not saying that I agree with the new rule but I don't think that it prohibits lowering of the head unless it's combined with contact by the lowered head. I think they can still lower their head as long as they hit with the shoulder.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Not saying that I agree with the new rule but I don't think that it prohibits lowering of the head unless it's combined with contact by the lowered head. I think they can still lower their head as long as they hit with the shoulder.

I get that but again it's Damm near impossible when you have multiple people tryna protect themselves while going 1,000 mph.

Honestly I'm all for protecting the players but the way their going about it. Its rushed, nonsensical & will never work when 3 levels of people (Owners, Refs, Players) aren't on the same page.

 

[1960Pats]

I get that but again it's Damm near impossible when you have multiple people tryna protect themselves while going 1,000 mph.

Honestly I'm all for protecting the players but the way their going about it. Its rushed, nonsensical & will never work when 3 levels of people (Owners, Refs, Players) aren't on the same page.

I don't think the rule is there to protect the players as much as it is to protect the owners from liability. IMHO the NYFL uses the safety rules as a way to discipline and control the players.

Edit: Not only are none of them on the same page they don't know what page to look for. The NYFL is getting more difficult to follow every day.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I don't think the rule is there to protect the players as much as it is to protect the owners from liability. IMHO the NYFL uses the safety rules as a way to discipline and control the players.

Edit: Not only are none of them on the same page they don't know what page to look for. The NYFL is getting more difficult to follow every day.

Yea you could see this coming a mile away which is part of the problem. From the jump it was made to cover their ass as opposed to fixing the problem.

 

[Deus Irae]

Hey, look. They've pulled back even further on the rule, without acknowledging that's what they've done.

Bouye indeed lowered his helmet, and his helmet made contact with Ham. In the league’s weekly officiating video, however, senior V.P. of officiating Al Riveron explains that it wasn’t a foul on Bouye because Bouye was actually bracing for contact.

Making the explanation even more intriguing, and potentially instructive: Riveron said that Ham, whose helmet also was lowered, was also bracing for contact. Ham didn’t actually make contact with his helmet, so it wasn’t a foul on him, anyway. (The officials flagged only Bouye.) But this notion of “bracing” for contact could be another way to limit and narrow the focus of a new rule ostensibly aimed at limiting the instances in which the helmet is used as a weapon.

NFL’s interpretation of A.J. Bouye hit provides more clarification of helmet rule

 

[1960Pats]

Yea you could see this coming a mile away which is part of the problem. From the jump it was made to cover their ass as opposed to fixing the problem.

There's also the issue with the instruction of the players before they play in the NYFL. If these young men spend half their lives learning to lead with the head then it won't be an easy fix, rules or no rules.

I'm surprised that there haven't been more Ryan Shazier type injuries. I wonder what can be done.

 

[Tunescribe]

There's also the issue with the instruction of the players before they play in the NYFL. If these young men spend half their lives learning to lead with the head then it won't be an easy fix, rules or no rules.

I'm surprised that there haven't been more Ryan Shazier type injuries. I wonder what can be done.

I'm curious why we don't see linemen (also linebackers/fullbacks) wearing the foam neck "donut" roll like in years past. Sure, it would hinder the player's ability to turn his head somewhat but it also might help avoid serious injury.

 

[1960Pats]

I'm curious why we don't see linemen (also linebackers/fullbacks) wearing the foam neck "donut" roll like in years past. Sure, it would hinder the player's ability to turn his head somewhat but it also might help avoid serious injury.

After knowing what I know now I would have insisted that my son wear one of those when he played HS football. "Luckily" he suffered a shoulder injury his senior year and missed his last season and then decided not to continue playing in college.

 

[long distance]

 

[Kontradiction]

Good progress. Now let’s get those numbers down to zero. Anyone that disagrees with this post is gay.