Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

New Helmet Rule


stirs

Recommended Posts

That rule change isn't even all that bad. It's outside the box. Just don't lower your head, lower your shoulder or get outta of bounds

Atleast the tuck rule is gone

The Ravens to me proved they'll do whatever anyway during the season and just take the fines, come playoff time anything goes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clark Judge@ClarkJudgeCBSnow

Fisher said he talked to Eddie George about rule and wasn't in favor. After explained to him in 15 minutes, Fisher said, George on board.

ProFootballTalk@ProFootballTalk1m

"We're talking about keeping the head up," Jeff Fisher explains. Runners can protect themselves, just not deliver blow with top of helmet.

ProFootballTalk@ProFootballTalk12s

After hearing the rule explained, it sounds like it will not be as extreme or severe as many initially believed.

ProFootballTalk@ProFootballTalknow

The new helmet-use rule is not reviewable by replay, according to NFL V.P. of officiating Dean Blandino. It's a judgment call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We'll have to see how this rule is put into practice... the spirit of it is limited to obvious spearing attempts by the offensive player in the open field and with all the rules limiting the use of the helmet as a weapon for defenders it only seems fair, but we'll have to say how the refs actually enforce this rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All RB's will be affected, Ive seen AP lower his head and truck defenders before.

Bringing your pad level down isn't against the rules, it's running behind your helmet and causing forceful contact with it that's illegal. A rb is still able to lower their pad level and truck defenders, just have to do it correctly now and lead with their shoulder pads and not their helmet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These rules are being made because players are suing the NFL every other day. The league has to protect themselves from future lawsuits so every player doesn't say the league didn't do anything to protect them.

NFLPA Moto:

"Let us go out there and kill each other but if we have life-long effects from it, you better be paying for it or we'll sue you"

I'm sure that is factor but it's absurd. Think about it. The NFL needs to pony up some of it's zillions of dollars and take care of the active and retired players medical expenses. Just pay health insurance that covers any football related medical problem then the players/ex players have no reason to sue. Head injuries and brain damage has and will always be a risk they take, Rule changes aren't going to eliminate the without eliminating the success of the NFL. A running back HAS to lower his head when he lowers his shoulders, it's often the only option because they use their arms and hands on many plays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that is factor but it's absurd. Think about it. The NFL needs to pony up some of it's zillions of dollars and take care of the active and retired players medical expenses. Just pay health insurance that covers any football related medical problem then the players/ex players have no reason to sue. Head injuries and brain damage has and will always be a risk they take, Rule changes aren't going to eliminate the without eliminating the success of the NFL. A running back HAS to lower his head when he lowers his shoulders, it's often the only option because they use their arms and hands on many plays.

They don't have to lower their head at all, You can keep your pad level down and your head high and up so you can see where your going. To lower your helmet all the way and block vision is stupid and a health risk. Go watch Jim Brown or Bettis run through people with their shoulders while keeping their head up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I'd give it a C mainly because of Brooks.  If we just didn't have a 2nd I'd argue B to B+ tbh. Brooks was a bad gamble, tho one that could still pay off long term. Yes XL only has 400 yards but... Look who is throwing him the ball. And I think he isn't a "true #1" but he's been able to consistently get open. Hands definitely need to be cleaned up.  But he should end the year with 500-600 yards. Like you said - Sanders looks great.  Get him a better QB / more time with a QB and I think he's gonna impress. We added a couple rotational players on D that have both made plays and show promise for the future from later rounds. So I'd say, Brooks really hurts this drafts grade. It'll be interesting to see how it progresses over the next 3 years. I've overall really liked Morgan's FA acquisitions, so...
    • Oh he would absolutely flourish. It’s the panthers way. It’s no different with coaches. Sometimes they reach their expiration date, go somewhere else, and find new success.  Similarly to Burns, how long to wait for the light to finally turn on?  Market forces will demand a salary that the panthers can not responsibly match. Sliding him to guard will fit his skill set better, but he has played LT for 3 years. He will receive offers from other teams wanting to pay him LT money.  At guard, he won’t start with what they have paid Hunt and Lewis. Center then?? Dunno. Maybe? He will become a backup by default once they draft their stud LT. I doubt Dan just stands pat. That’s not his MO.  So where does this put him? Can you match what other teams will offer for a backup LT/guard? Do you dish out franchise LT $ on a guy who still needs significant improvement in pass protection. This team will be DOA in the playoffs with the very first team who has a formidable speed rusher. What if he has hit his ceiling in pass protection already and they sign him long term? It’s a big gamble either way. 
    • We're in a great position to see just how big of a misstep it would be, having made so many ourselves
×
×
  • Create New...