well they pass the new rule leading with crown...

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.
    Image

    “There’s no reason, with Mr. Allen and the fan base here and the stadium, that this can’t be a stable, long-term winning organization.” - John Schneider
    User avatar
    Bakergirl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3302
    Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:13 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    Why? We should be slamming the twitter handles of all the owners before they vote on this. Once they vote it through, complaining will be pointless. Complain now and let all the owners hear it, before they vote.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2979
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


  • It's just one more little thing for the refs to have to pay attention to and screw up.

    In the end it will probably not make things any safer.

    this is getting to the point where it would be like loading up your new car with 400 fancy techie doo-dads for 'safety' that end up just being a sensory overload of distractions that in the end aren't helping anymore than simply "paying attention".
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2732
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • Cartire wrote:
    Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    Why? We should be slamming the twitter handles of all the owners before they vote on this. Once they vote it through, complaining will be pointless. Complain now and let all the owners hear it, before they vote.


    Do you really think the opinions of fans on the subject will do anything to sway their opinions or decision on the matter? No. Players have already voiced their concerns with it, and the owners may or may not listen to them.
    Image

    “There’s no reason, with Mr. Allen and the fan base here and the stadium, that this can’t be a stable, long-term winning organization.” - John Schneider
    User avatar
    Bakergirl
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3302
    Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:13 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • Bakergirl wrote:
    Cartire wrote:
    Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    Why? We should be slamming the twitter handles of all the owners before they vote on this. Once they vote it through, complaining will be pointless. Complain now and let all the owners hear it, before they vote.


    Do you really think the opinions of fans on the subject will do anything to sway their opinions or decision on the matter? No. Players have already voiced their concerns with it, and the owners may or may not listen to them.


    I think I see owners all the time using their twitter. And the fact that most of them our good business men, they do take into account fan reaction when its loud enough. Sure, we can assume it wont work, and not do anything, and then we will have already answered our question. Or we do reach out to them (like I already have done) and give it a chance.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2979
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


  • I don't like it.

    I also read just a minute ago on nfl.com that they reviewed all the games from week 16 last year and found 5 instances where they would flag.


    The crown of the helmet one of the GM's was trying to define as if you were to put a beanine on the helmet.

    "If this idea -- which first gained traction in Indianapolis during the competition committee's meeting at the NFL Scouting Combine -- is approved, the head-on move will result in a 15-yard penalty, and the offending player will be subject to a fine. If an offensive player and a defensive player both lower their heads, the resulting penalties will offset. The rule only will be in effect outside the tackle box, or 3 yards downfield."

    :177692:
    ______________________________

    Our secondary is gonna be like the Bermuda Triangle this year again boys! 2/3rds of the world is covered by water..... the rest is covered by the LOB!

    Made....Laid.....Paid!!!
    User avatar
    nwgamer
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 356
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:26 am
    Location: Cashmere, WA


  • Bakergirl wrote:
    Cartire wrote:
    Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    Why? We should be slamming the twitter handles of all the owners before they vote on this. Once they vote it through, complaining will be pointless. Complain now and let all the owners hear it, before they vote.


    Do you really think the opinions of fans on the subject will do anything to sway their opinions or decision on the matter? No. Players have already voiced their concerns with it, and the owners may or may not listen to them.


    Yeah, most successful business people tend to completely ignore the wishes of their clients. Seems like a good business practice...
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11352
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    The time to bitch and complain about something really important to you is not after the fact. If someone cheats in a board game you dont let him play anyway and then complain about how he cheated and its not fair after he wins.
    User avatar
    therealjohncarlson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3454
    Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm


  • http://www.nfl.com

    NEWS

    NFL owners yet to vote on crown-of-helmet rule
    March 19, 2013

    Team owners passed two player health and safety-related rules Tuesday at the NFL Annual Meeting in Phoenix. One rule bans peel-back blocks, and the other keeps teams from overloading one side of the defensive line on point-after and field-goal attempts.

    Still at issue is the controversial rule proposal to ban crown-of-the-helmet hits by ball carriers.
    ______________________________

    Our secondary is gonna be like the Bermuda Triangle this year again boys! 2/3rds of the world is covered by water..... the rest is covered by the LOB!

    Made....Laid.....Paid!!!
    User avatar
    nwgamer
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 356
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:26 am
    Location: Cashmere, WA


  • Bakergirl wrote:
    Cartire wrote:
    Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    Why? We should be slamming the twitter handles of all the owners before they vote on this. Once they vote it through, complaining will be pointless. Complain now and let all the owners hear it, before they vote.


    Do you really think the opinions of fans on the subject will do anything to sway their opinions or decision on the matter? No. Players have already voiced their concerns with it, and the owners may or may not listen to them.

    Yeah, players have publicly voiced their concerns, but their actions (and actions of former players) speak volumes much more so than the words of some publicly outspoken guys. The lawsuits and the NFLPA, imo, are why this rule will pass. All these lawsuits result in money out of the owner's pockets. So they will take a "stand" to make the game "safer" Honestly though, what are they supposed to do?
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1674
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • nwgamer wrote:I don't like it.

    I also read just a minute ago on nfl.com that they reviewed all the games from week 16 last year and found 5 instances where they would flag.


    :177692:


    And lets not forget that this is guys who are watching film and discussing the events. These are not refs in realtime. Chances are very likely that this penalty would get called 3 times that amount, wrongly, because of the speed of the game.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2979
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


  • Teqneek wrote:
    themunn wrote:
    sa_seahawker wrote:This is like telling the Army they can't shoot armor piercing bullets, cause it may hurt someone. It's football. It's a sad day when the Lingerie League is making harder hits.


    It's hardly the same. It's not only dangerous for the player being speared, but the running back too. There's no reason for it in football. Lynch uses a stiff arm or pure brute strength to run players over so it won't affect him

    It won't stop him from doing his thing:
    Image
    and

    Also, it will lead to less helmet to helmet collisions. If the RB leads with his head it forces the defender to get even lower to make the tackle. Think of the number of times Kam was fined in 2011 for this very problem.


    He dropped his head... Looks like what its intending to stop?


    No, he lowers his shoulder. The rule is to prevent LEADING with the head.
    I can't access youtube from work but if you can find the video from the Vikings game (2nd quarter 7:52 to go, AP 16 yard run tackle by Earl Thomas) you'll see exactly what it's aiming to prevent (I have NFL gamepass so can access highlights of the full match, but can't post any videos here)
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2460
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • Bakergirl wrote:
    Cartire wrote:
    Bakergirl wrote:Let's actually give them time to vote on the subject before we say the sky is falling.


    Why? We should be slamming the twitter handles of all the owners before they vote on this. Once they vote it through, complaining will be pointless. Complain now and let all the owners hear it, before they vote.


    Do you really think the opinions of fans on the subject will do anything to sway their opinions or decision on the matter? No. Players have already voiced their concerns with it, and the owners may or may not listen to them.


    I'm not saying it'll do any good, but the more vehement the protests are, the higher the possibility that they can't get enough votes to pass it and they table it for further review. It may not get that desired outcome, but I can't see how it would hurt to voice displeasure to those doing the voting so they know the feelings (or for those who are behind it, to voice that as well).
    :les:

    Image
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 13451
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • CANHawk wrote:
    Yeah, most successful business people tend to completely ignore the wishes of their clients. Seems like a good business practice...

    Let's be real, the NFL stands to lose absolutely nothing if this rule passes and nothing if it doesn't. No one will stop watching the NFL or stop spending their money on the product based on outcome of the this rule.
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1674
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • yes!! Great idea!! Lets allow even more subjective interpretation to the fantastic referees this game has! Because, you know, they've totally shown they can be trusted to not throw the flag on random plays like the Lynch one above where the offensive player slightly lowers his head. Too bad I dont share your great enthusiasm for the refs we have.
    User avatar
    therealjohncarlson
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3454
    Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:Yeah, players have publicly voiced their concerns, but their actions (and actions of former players) speak volumes much more so than the words of some publicly outspoken guys. The lawsuits and the NFLPA, imo, are why this rule will pass. All these lawsuits result in money out of the owner's pockets. So they will take a "stand" to make the game "safer" Honestly though, what are they supposed to do?


    Create waiver forms.... Why are they constantly trying to solve lawsuit problems like this? NFL players recieve MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to play the game. They make more money in a few years then 90% of the population will in a lifetime. They knowingly play a game that is physical and dangerous.

    I was in the navy for 8 years. I had to sign waiver forms all time time (hazmat, ect) because the Navy and most work places are not gonna allow employees the right to sue them, just because they got hurt doing a dangerous job.

    They need to stop the problem at the source. But overpaid lawyers will always try and find ways to exploit wealthy people, and this is one of them. Most these class action lawsuits come from lawyers calling explayers and asking if they hurt.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2979
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


  • Just to play devil's advocate, Marshawn appears to use his helmet like a bighorn sheep on a lot of plays :stirthepot:
    Why is it when I try to come off as a smart ass, the opposite happens? :-(
    User avatar
    grizbob
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
    *TOP 5 SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 2326
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:17 am
    Location: Born in Oakharbor, raised in the west, sentenced to life in St George


  • themunn wrote:
    No, he lowers his shoulder. The rule is to prevent LEADING with the head.
    I can't access youtube from work but if you can find the video from the Vikings game (2nd quarter 7:52 to go, AP 16 yard run tackle by Earl Thomas) you'll see exactly what it's aiming to prevent (I have NFL gamepass so can access highlights of the full match, but can't post any videos here)


    The very fact that you have to debate this situation, with a slo mo view, is why this rule is horrible. Cause interpretation has you thinking its one thing and others thinking its another. Speed this play up with an excited ref, and you have a flag. 15 yard penalty.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2979
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am


  • Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 6m
    The crown-of-the-helmet rule has also passed by a wide margin, I'm told.
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1674
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • On paper, it sounds fine. But you KNOW that live speed, every time a RB dips his head they will call a penalty. They will be over eager to get the call right, and it will be called incorrectly more times than not.

    Yes, Marshawn would not be flagged for that SF run on replay, but in live game speed he would have been called for a penalty...and it is not challengable. Especially because he ran so vicious on that play. That's what worries me about this rule.
    Image
    Radish and Cheinhill — Gone, but not forgotten
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11507
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 6m
    The crown-of-the-helmet rule has also passed by a wide margin, I'm told.



    just saw it. Well, there goes that.

    I predict that next year, they will have instant replay on penalties because of all the egregious penalties, further slowing down the game and creating 5 hour long games.
    hawksincebirth wrote:So Russell has leverage but marshawn doesn't ? I thought its next man up. Hey we got t jack and bj Daniels right ??
    User avatar
    Cartire
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2979
    Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:49 am



  • As long as they only penalize blatant violations of this rule than I'm okay with it, but as one of the other posters said, officials watching the play at full speed will probably end up flagging legitimate plays that look like violations at first blush. It's the Chancellor hit all over again: perfectly legal in retrospect, but it LOOKED illegal at the time and wound up being flagged. The same thing will happen here.

    And I'm okay with reviewing personal foul penalties, but only if they take reviews away from the on-field officials and have them done in a replay booth upstairs like they do in college football and pro hockey. Any time taken up by additional reviews would be more than offset by the time saved not having to wait for some fat-@$$ed referee to jog over to one corner of the field and back any time there is a replay.
    User avatar
    Shadowhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1280
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:05 am


  • I don't think it'll affect Lynch too much as far as penalties are concerned. He has his panted stiff arm that he likes to use in the open field. I think what may happen is that it could open him up to more fumbles when using his stiff arm and someone comes from behind to try and knock the ball loose. That would be where my concern lies.

    I understand the reason behind the ruling. With the NFL facing dramatic lawsuits due to post career injuries, they HAVE to show that they are working towards making the sport safer or else they risk losing way too much in the courts to sustain the league. It's a lose/lose scenario we are in. Hopefully the refs will use a lot of discretion or at least fairness when handing out the penalties on this.
    :les:

    Image
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 13451
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


  • These guys get paid MILLIONS to play this game. They know the risks. They could also choose another occupation. The NFL is becoming "touch football". What's next? Flag football? And yes, the games will be way longer because of replay review concerning this. Ughh...Why does this have to happen when the Hawks actually become good?
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2442
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • Seahwkgal wrote:These guys get paid MILLIONS to play this game. They know the risks. They could also choose another occupation. The NFL is becoming "touch football". What's next? Flag football? And yes, the games will be way longer because of replay review concerning this. Ughh...Why does this have to happen when the Hawks actually become good?


    unfortunately how much the players make is insignificant. It's all about how much the executives, agents, and advertisers get. The players make a lot of money but it's a tiny fraction of the business.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2732
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • Ultimate coward move by the NFL. Way to ruin the game we love assholes, one rule at a time
    User avatar
    Missing_Clink
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2409
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am


  • http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... itter_news

    Yep gonna hate this new rule I'm sure, but I'm willing to let it play out and see how well the refs officiate it before I totally dismiss it.
    Last edited by BallHawker on Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
    User avatar
    BallHawker
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
    *SILVER SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 518
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:16 pm
    Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana


  • Roger Goodell is the Devil. It is known.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2442
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • Seahwkgal wrote:Roger Goodell is the Devil. It is known.

    It's kind of annoying that Goodell automatically gets blamed for everything is some sort of knee jerk reaction. You don't have to like the guy but seriously...how is this on him?
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1674
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • WOOOOOOOOOOOW. The NFL is a joke. I get the rule, but I feel like they failed to realize that refs are going to throw flags whenever THEY feel like someone is leading with the head. Can't wait for hundreds of flags to be thrown because someone is ducking into a pile, or trying to split two defenders.


    Can't help but feel bad for the ball carriers going into this season. Chances are none of them change a damn thing they do, HOPEFULLY.


    Kind of excited to see this blow up in Roger's face. WHAT A MORON.


    ALSO. Can't wait to watch the Pro-bowl 16 weeks out of the year. Cause, we all know how exciting that can be!
    Last edited by SouthSoundHawk on Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2140
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


  • SouthSoundHawk wrote:WOOOOOOOOOOOW. The NFL is a joke. I get the rule, but I feel like they failed to realize that refs are going to throw flags whenever THEY feel like someone is leading with the head. Can't wait for hundreds of flags to be thrown because someone is ducking into a pile, or trying to split two defenders.


    Can't help but feel bad for the ball carriers going into this season. Chances are none of them change a damn thing they do, HOPEFULLY.


    Kind of excited to see this blow up in Roger's face. WHAT A MORON.


    But didn't you just hear "how is this all Roger's fault?".. :stirthepot:
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2442
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • What a stupid rule if it goes down. What are they gonna do about the goal line when backs are fighting for every yard? It doesn't seem like it has ever been a problem. I don't remember a lot of head injuries to running backs on the plays they are trying to stop.
    User avatar
    bigtrain21
    * NET GIF Master *
     
    Posts: 1194
    Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:48 am


  • More flags, more time-outs, more commercials. I want to puke.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2442
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • This will probably hurt running teams the most, I hate this passing league only crap we have to watch now. We might as well just get rid of the RB and just have a QB throw the ball then after a catch rule the play dead.

    Seattle, San Francisco, Minnesota, Tampa, and any other team with a good RB has made the running game a liability when they devise a run heavy game plan.
    NFL, all your Owlz are belong to us!
    User avatar
    12th_Bob
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1789
    Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 7:56 pm


  • The NFL does not want the NFC West teams to dominate. God forbid that their favorite teams don't make the SB. I am really starting to hate the league now. They keep showing the Robinson hit on Jennings over and over again. Marshall Faulk is not happy at all about this and I for one completely agree with his gripe.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2442
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


  • i feel bad for running backs entering this draft. have fun with your 6th/7th round salaries.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2732
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    CANHawk wrote:
    Yeah, most successful business people tend to completely ignore the wishes of their clients. Seems like a good business practice...

    Let's be real, the NFL stands to lose absolutely nothing if this rule passes and nothing if it doesn't. No one will stop watching the NFL or stop spending their money on the product based on outcome of the this rule.


    Yep. and Enron was worth $100 billion dollars once upon a time ago. What's your point? I agree, this "one rule" isn't going to break them, but it's the continued errosion of what made the game popular in the first place that could eventually make people drift away. With all these cockameme rule changes, I can't help but wonder what comes next, and if I'm still going to care in 15 years.
    Radish, check your PMs. Man upstairs has an invite for a tail gate up in heaven with your name on it.
    User avatar
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 11352
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • nfl only cares about advertising dollars, and mainstream companies only want to advertise their products during non-controversial television broadcasts. Unless of course the controversy is fraudulent faux-controversy 'reality' tv or something of course, then it's ok.

    its pretty much that simple.
    Image
    User avatar
    Hawknballs
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2732
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:51 am


  • It's just another vague rule that will help the NFL control outcomes of games.

    Luckily, Seattle is now one of the NFL's darling teams, so they will make sure it benefits us more then it hurts us :)

    In all honesty though, I think this would effect Robinson more then Lynch, can't remember a play with Lynch leading with the crown of his helmet...but can remember at least two where Mike Rob did.
    Image
    User avatar
    DericLee
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 862
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:17 pm


  • DericLee wrote:It's just another vague rule that will help the NFL control outcomes of games.

    Luckily, Seattle is now one of the NFL's darling teams, so they will make sure it benefits us more then it hurts us :)


    We'd have to hope so.
    User avatar
    Greenhell
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2770
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:46 am



  • Until they have review for these penalties, this will be a stupid rule.

    Kams hit on Davis last year should not have been flagged, but was. And this new rule falls under the same "error on the side of caution" type of referee enforcement.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11076
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Scottemojo wrote:Until they have review for these penalties, this will be a stupid rule.

    Kams hit on Davis last year should not have been flagged, but was. And this new rule falls under the same "error on the side of caution" type of referee enforcement.


    Yep.. and those are the some of the most aggravating bad calls. When your player shows an increased intensity of play and then gets wrongfully penalized for it...
    User avatar
    The Outfield
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2238
    Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:11 am


  • This will certainly affect Lynch, and the refs will be watching for him.

    The actual quote from the ESPN article isn't "5 plays would've been flagged last year" but "5 backs would be flagged last year". They also go on to mention Forte, Lynch and Adrian Peterson by name as guys that will have to alter their style.

    I also agree that this will be open to misinterpretation like the Kam hit on Davis last year. That could've cost us a TD if our defense wasn't on it that game. Notice that Kam got flagged, but he didn't get fined. It still affects the outcome of the game, and this new rule will as well.
    Hawks46
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3637
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm


  • The Outfield wrote:
    Scottemojo wrote:Until they have review for these penalties, this will be a stupid rule.

    Kams hit on Davis last year should not have been flagged, but was. And this new rule falls under the same "error on the side of caution" type of referee enforcement.


    Yep.. and those are the some of the most aggravating bad calls. When your player shows an increased intensity of play and then gets wrongfully penalized for it...


    I will go one farther: Until the review is done by an official who is not one of the field crew, I won't buy that it is free of bias.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11076
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • No matter what people think of this rule or what side they line up on in the debate one this is certain, it will affect us and our boy Marshawn negatively this year.

    I mean whenever we did run a toss play with Marshawn, outside the tackle box, he would almost always finishes his runs by lowering his head and squeaking out as many yards as possible and now after doing it his entire career you expect him to change that overnight?........smh. This is a horrible rule and will hurt us way more than it will help.
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 11065
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • The NFL is a joke now. I am all for players not getting hurt but for F's-sake this game is a CONTACT sport, not baseball. Instead of keeping the game the way it is supposed to be, they want to ruin it. Instead of paying the players more and giving them guaranteed contracts, the NFL makes more and more and pays less. If they really cared about the players that's what they'd do, instead they just want to keep their "investments" on the field but don't care about the integrity of the game. With this move all they are trying to prevent is future lawsuits for brain damage and whatnot. Pretty soon the NFL will be the Arena League with 80-90% passes and running only to get 1 or 2 yards. I miss the game I grew up with.
    User avatar
    McG
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 843
    Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:30 am
    Location: Van Buren, AR from Kent-Covington, WA


  • It is reported that this would have been called 5 times last year.

    I will bet money it gets called more than 5 times this year. The refs will error on this one.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11076
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Funny Jeff Fisher is behind this rule. Just sayin.
    travlinhawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 428
    Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 5:46 pm


Next


It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 2:41 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online
cron