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

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:Another transparent attempt to turn the NFL into a pure passing league. I'm amazed by their ingenuity.

    Yet the owners (ours included) voted for it...hmmm...maybe there is no vast conspiracy?
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1676
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • Cartire wrote:That seems fine until you have refs calling the penalty in real-time. To many plays will get flagged because its to fast and the refs will flag it regardless. To many huge plays have been reversed because of flags. See Kam hit on Davis for an example. All were doing is giving the refs more opinionated control of the game.

    This has way to much conspiracy written into it, but I truly think that money talks. And with the amount of money that football betting brings in, you would be stupid not to assume that some of these refs cant be bought. And you would also be stupid to not assume, that some of these rules are in place just to give the refs some extra ability at controlling games.

    I think what pisses me off even more than giving SOME of these clowns the freedom to make a call like this without INSTANT replay conformation, or overturn, is the dumbass Leagues head honcho following up on a bad call with a f#^@&g fine.
    That's like saying I don't care that this bad call was unwarented, just suck it up, and take the injustice up your ass.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3756
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • edogg23 wrote:Hope they come to their senses and vote that one down. This is rediculous.

    personally I think it's greendiculous, but that's just me.
    Richard Sherman doesn't just wanna get in your head, he wants to build a vacation home there.

    R. Sherman: "I don't want to be an island. I want to be a tourist attraction. You come, I take your money & you go."
    User avatar
    SalishHawkFan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4864
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 8:39 pm


  • kidhawk wrote:
    sa_seahawker wrote:So much for the goal line fullback dive. That move leads with the crown of the helmet too.


    Dives are ALWAYS between the tackles, and this rule is only OUTSIDE the tackles. It doesn't change this one bit. This is for OPEN FIELD situations, not BUNCHED up groups.

    So if it's done in a bunched up situation, it removes the penalty option, as well as the same possibility for injury?
    I guess I don't understand the difference.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3756
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • The NFL is covering their ass, because there are too many bleeding hearts that would like to see football banned. :thfight7:
    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: 2357
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:17 am
    Location: Born in Oakharbor, raised in the west, sentenced to life in St George


  • This is about former player lawsuits, not about player safety or anything else.
    User avatar
    hoxrox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1361
    Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:29 pm


  • All this player safety BS is really starting to piss me off. Nobody forces the players to play, they all choose to because it beats pumping gas or working a checkout at Walmart.
    There are so many far more dangerous jobs done by hard working people who never come close to seeing a million dollars in their whole lifetime never mind the tens of millions that some of these nancy boys make.
    Another rule change or two similar to this one and it won't be long before teams are regularly racking up more penalty yards than passing yards.
    User avatar
    el capitan
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 399
    Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:48 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.


    How many other plays should not have been flagged but were due to "heat of the moment" flags?
    ie. how many flags were thrown but fines not given for such plays for us last year?

    Kam didn't get a fine for that play because they reviewed it and said it was OK.
    I don't remember it happening any other time in over 1000 snaps. Note: I'm not talking about plays where the refs have thrown soft flags like Earl's PI against Miami or just about every call in the Green Bay game, I'm talking about ones where they've called a player's play dangerous when it was within the rules.
    themunn
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2566
    Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 4:38 pm


  • hoxrox wrote:This is about former player lawsuits, not about player safety or anything else.


    While you and I .....and many folk with common sense...know this, many will "cover their asses" by saying that it is for "player safety"......all the time knowing that it will radically change the game as we now know it!! These "bleeding-heart Liberals" just can't help themselves!
    Bigpumpkin
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4867
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


  • My guess is that we won't even know this rule exists in 90% of games and it will not have any impact and we won't notice a different. Freaking out about nothing.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18687
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • JSeahawks wrote:My guess is that we won't even know this rule exists in 90% of games and it will not have any impact and we won't notice a different. Freaking out about nothing.


    True, but it's that 10% that "freaks" me out. This IS the Seahawks we're talking about :180670:
    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: 2357
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:17 am
    Location: Born in Oakharbor, raised in the west, sentenced to life in St George


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    MontanaHawk05 wrote:Another transparent attempt to turn the NFL into a pure passing league. I'm amazed by their ingenuity.

    Yet the owners (ours included) voted for it...hmmm...maybe there is no vast conspiracy?


    Not there, but there might be a common belief that more passing = more points = more viewers = more revenue.
    GO HAWKS!!!

    Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!

    Follow me on Twitter at @17power
    User avatar
    MontanaHawk05
    * 17Power Blogger *
     
    Posts: 11465
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am


  • For people who keep saying this is "ruining the game" I have to wonder, were my high school coaches ruining the game also when they taught us to never initiate contact with the top of our helmet on either side of the ball?

    The way I see it, upset fans seem to have 2 different angles for their rage:

    1. The reduction of violent collisions (which includes the 'two-hand touch' and 'pussification' crowds)
    2. The in-game officials having too much subjective power

    I can see the 2nd, but anyone upset by #1 must also think that youngsters have been taught the wrong way to play football – as it pertains to the crown of the helmet – since at least the 1990s.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkAroundTheClock
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1589
    Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:30 pm
    Location: Olympia


  • MontanaHawk05 wrote:
    Not there, but there might be a common belief that more passing = more points = more viewers = more revenue.


    As soon as this new rule is called twice a game, there will be an increase of pass plays by 10% or more. The demand for running backs will drop as they get fewer carrys as will their financial reimbursement. When this happens, the Player Association will see the folly of this lawsuit......and will drop it by mutual agreement.
    Bigpumpkin
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4867
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


  • What most of you don't realize is that the crown of your head is more towards the back of your head then the front of your head. The rule is being made a big deal, but truthfully it is best for all involved. This rule will not change much of the season- it's more to promote player safety and awareness as well as cover their butts.

    The player can still put their head down a bit, they just can lead drop their chin to their chest all the way.

    http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000152145/Crown-of-the-helmet-hit-rule-explained?campaign=Twitter_videos_crown

    Summary:
    -Jeff Fisher points to the crown of his head (back top portion) and state that is the only part that is involved in this rule change. The face mask and front top of the head (hairline) is legal.
    - They are going to send tape that is legal and a lot of it will be, there will only be a few instances in which it won't be legal.
    - In order for this play to even be illegal the player must "line up" the other player in the open field.
    - They will teach the on field officials the proper way. Before the penalty is called, the officials are encouraged to meet in a group to come to a consensus rather than calling it from just one view.

    Notes:
    -The Michael Robinson hit on the Bears CB was included, but I didn't see the Lynch play vs. the 49ers on there.


    Do you really think 31 out of 32 teams would agree on this rule if it meant players couldn't be aggresive? Of course not. They are trying to make it clear that when you go up against another guy, you shouldn't drop your head so that your face mask is parallel with the ground which could cause serious spinal cord issues.
    Image

    "We all we got, we all we need"
    User avatar
    lukerguy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1495
    Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:00 pm


  • Also, on the Lynch hit vs. Goldson he hits his shoulder & head into him. I would be shocked if that is an illegal hit based upon what I've read and how to interpret it.
    Image

    "We all we got, we all we need"
    User avatar
    lukerguy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1495
    Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:00 pm


  • Just listening to John Clayton on 710 ESPN he said the NFL only looked through 2 weeks of games to make a judgement on this rule. So those 11 timea it would be called a penalty number people were throwing out there.......those 11 were in only a 2 week stretch, not the entire season. Meaning that this would be a call or penalty much more often than it should be. Again......horrible rule.
    Image
    User avatar
    Blitzer88
    * NET Eeyore *
     
    Posts: 11249
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:47 am
    Location: Pasco, WA


  • I don't think hitting with face mask is going to be illegal, which is mostly what lynch does.

    I think they are trying to stop this:


    and it should be illegal. Defensive players have been getting jobbed for rule changes that are good for both players, this is just the offensive side of the ball picking up on safety.
    User avatar
    sturg78
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1323
    Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:03 pm


  • sa_seahawker wrote:So much for the goal line fullback dive. That move leads with the crown of the helmet too.


    That wouldn't be affected. It's OUTSIDE the tackle box. It won't affect 3rd and short situations.
    jlwaters1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2433
    Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:48 pm


  • HawkAroundTheClock wrote:For people who keep saying this is "ruining the game" I have to wonder, were my high school coaches ruining the game also when they taught us to never initiate contact with the top of our helmet on either side of the ball?

    The way I see it, upset fans seem to have 2 different angles for their rage:

    1. The reduction of violent collisions (which includes the 'two-hand touch' and 'pussification' crowds)
    2. The in-game officials having too much subjective power

    I can see the 2nd, but anyone upset by #1 must also think that youngsters have been taught the wrong way to play football – as it pertains to the crown of the helmet – since at least the 1990s.


    They are talking about abandoning kickoffs. They've already almost made return specialists irrelevant by moving up the kickoff spot. How is that not changing the game? What about laying WRs out across the middle? A staple of players like Sam Huff, Ronnie Lott, and Tatum. That's gone. Now the RB, a position that up until this point has been sacrosanct because he's carrying the ball, is being meddled with. Walter Payton would laugh at the absurdity. They are indeed trying to change the game and the way it's played. If you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

    Rog is a lawyer and he's administering the league like a lawyer, with the approval of the owners. I have little patience anymore with their ridiculous fake crusade. It's probably why I get so irritated by the continuous stream of rules they insist on pushing through.
    Tall men come down to my height when I hit 'em in the body.

    Jack Dempsey
    User avatar
    Fuzzman55
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1576
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 3:10 pm



  • Scottemojo wrote: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.



    NOT 5 times last year. 5 times in week 17 alone. So that would be roughly 85 calls in a single year.
    jlwaters1
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2433
    Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:48 pm


  • Fuzzman55 wrote:
    HawkAroundTheClock wrote:For people who keep saying this is "ruining the game" I have to wonder, were my high school coaches ruining the game also when they taught us to never initiate contact with the top of our helmet on either side of the ball?

    The way I see it, upset fans seem to have 2 different angles for their rage:

    1. The reduction of violent collisions (which includes the 'two-hand touch' and 'pussification' crowds)
    2. The in-game officials having too much subjective power

    I can see the 2nd, but anyone upset by #1 must also think that youngsters have been taught the wrong way to play football – as it pertains to the crown of the helmet – since at least the 1990s.


    They are talking about abandoning kickoffs. They've already almost made return specialists irrelevant by moving up the kickoff spot. How is that not changing the game? What about laying WRs out across the middle? A staple of players like Sam Huff, Ronnie Lott, and Tatum. That's gone. Now the RB, a position that up until this point has been sacrosanct because he's carrying the ball, is being meddled with. Walter Payton would laugh at the absurdity. They are indeed trying to change the game and the way it's played. If you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

    Rog is a lawyer and he's administering the league like a lawyer, with the approval of the owners. I have little patience anymore with their ridiculous fake crusade. It's probably why I get so irritated by the continuous stream of rules they insist on pushing through.


    Kickoffs have nothing to do with this thread. I never mentioned kickoffs.

    And I did not say "change" the game. I was trying to find out the specific reason(s) why some people use the word "ruin" to describe what the crown rule is doing.

    When I played in high school I was taught that no contact should be initiated with the crown of the helmet. So if this rule is "ruining" the game because it eliminates the battering effect of the crown of the helmet, then I guess my HS coaches were ruining football right from the get-go for me.

    The game has seen many, many changes. This rule, by itself, is so minor as compared to so many other changes in the game's history (plastic helmets, facemasks, goal posts moved off the field, etc.). It's going to be in the application of it, i.e., how often it is called and how accurately it is called, that will determine how much it changes – or even ruins – the game.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkAroundTheClock
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1589
    Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:30 pm
    Location: Olympia


  • JSeahawks wrote:My guess is that we won't even know this rule exists in 90% of games and it will not have any impact and we won't notice a different. Freaking out about nothing.


    How many little things cost us the division and a bye week last season? I don't think I'll soon get over that delay of game in the 49ers-Rams game. I wouldn't make the argument above. Little things can make a huge difference in hyper competitive situations.

    As far as the rule, it would be a better rule if it was reviewable. Human error is what worries me, and I think the argument that this might increase injuries has some traction.

    It didn't result in a penalty, but remember all the hand wringing over the Golden Tate block in the Dallas game last year? If nothing else, I'd like to tamper down that mindless debate, not exacerbate it. This isn't a good direction for the league to head in, IMO.

    I'd support a system where plays are reviewed after games and fines/suspensions might be a consideration (1 game suspensions for flagrant/multiple offenders). That way you are incentivising safe play without inviting blown calls.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11394
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


  • I already posted earlier, but this league is starting to become a joke to me. If you can get past the 120-180min of commercials and stoppages and actually get to the 60mins of game time then you are a pro in your own right. It's just getting to point of unwatchable and all the pussy rules and over advertising is starting to make me sick. Unreal.
    User avatar
    McG
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 844
    Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:30 am
    Location: Van Buren, AR from Kent-Covington, WA


  • Fuzzman55 wrote:
    They are talking about abandoning kickoffs. They've already almost made return specialists irrelevant by moving up the kickoff spot. How is that not changing the game? What about laying WRs out across the middle? A staple of players like Sam Huff, Ronnie Lott, and Tatum. That's gone. Now the RB, a position that up until this point has been sacrosanct because he's carrying the ball, is being meddled with. Walter Payton would laugh at the absurdity. They are indeed trying to change the game and the way it's played. If you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

    Rog is a lawyer and he's administering the league like a lawyer, with the approval of the owners. I have little patience anymore with their ridiculous fake crusade. It's probably why I get so irritated by the continuous stream of rules they insist on pushing through.



    You are 100% correrct!! Dead on!!
    Bigpumpkin
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 4867
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:13 pm
    Location: Puyallup, WA USA


  • JSeahawks wrote:My guess is that we won't even know this rule exists in 90% of games and it will not have any impact and we won't notice a different. Freaking out about nothing.

    This.

    Much ado about nothing, imo. The people most upset probable have no idea about this rule and think "physical play" isn't allowed anymore.
    SUPERBOWL!!
    User avatar
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1676
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:46 pm


  • el capitan wrote:All this player safety BS is really starting to piss me off. Nobody forces the players to play, they all choose to because it beats pumping gas or working a checkout at Walmart.
    There are so many far more dangerous jobs done by hard working people who never come close to seeing a million dollars in their whole lifetime never mind the tens of millions that some of these nancy boys make.
    Another rule change or two similar to this one and it won't be long before teams are regularly racking up more penalty yards than passing yards.

    None of this explains to me why you shouldn't care about their health. Nobody deserves to be paralyzed or become demented for your amusement. I worry about the subjectivity of this rule, and I'm not convinced it's going to work in practice, but as a philosophy I'm glad the league is trying to prolong players' careers and lives.
    User avatar
    jkitsune
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2275
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 12:12 pm


  • McG wrote:I already posted earlier, but this league is starting to become a joke to me. If you can get past the 120-180min of commercials and stoppages and actually get to the 60mins of game time then you are a pro in your own right. It's just getting to point of unwatchable and all the pussy rules and over advertising is starting to make me sick. Unreal.


    Feel free to stop watching
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9779
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA



  • You know what's really stupid? "The NFL went back and looked at week 17 games say they only would have called the penalty 5 or 6 times." Uh...wtf? They were reviewing film, a referee has to call it in real-time and decide "intent."

    Once this starts screwing teams over and deciding games, it will be changed, but it will be too late then.

    This should be reviewable because the play by MikeRob would have been called a penalty and would have been wrong.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8884
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • lukerguy wrote:Also, on the Lynch hit vs. Goldson he hits his shoulder & head into him. I would be shocked if that is an illegal hit based upon what I've read and how to interpret it.

    As the hit shown in your avatar, Tate gets a fine from the League for leading with the SIDE of his helmet, and we don't have a thing to fuss over?, no Referee mistake there?
    That was a bullshit call, going all the way to the top, and NOT being corrected, okay, I trust that the Refs won't make that same mistake again, and again, and again, and again.
    Kam's hit on V.D. and again, and again,,,OH, that's right!, he didn't get fined for that, but the 15 yard +++ penalty was still upheld without a review to overturn because it was the Ref that made a MISTAKE ,and NOT Kam.
    scutterhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3756
    Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm


  • lukerguy wrote:Also, on the Lynch hit vs. Goldson he hits his shoulder & head into him. I would be shocked if that is an illegal hit based upon what I've read and how to interpret it.

    Like your avatar which was a clean hit it matters how its seen by the zebras in real time. Just like Kam's hit on #85, it was legal but drew 3 flags, tha means 3 refs blew that call on the same play! Instead of making more rules, they need to streamline the rules and simplify the rule book so there is less gray area. Good gawd how I hate Rog Goodell!
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!
    User avatar
    Sports Hernia
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12135
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: Lombardi Land


  • So the new rule is essentially taking spearing, which has been illegal for years on the defensive side of the ball, and extending that over to the offense?
    I hate Tim Ruskell.
    User avatar
    Trrrroy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2869
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:24 am


  • Trrrroy wrote:So the new rule is essentially taking spearing, which has been illegal for years on the defensive side of the ball, and extending that over to the offense?


    Yes. But only if its in the open field.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18687
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • JSeahawks wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:So the new rule is essentially taking spearing, which has been illegal for years on the defensive side of the ball, and extending that over to the offense?


    Yes. But only if its in the open field.


    HOW UNREASONABLE!!! :sarcasm_off:

    Seriously, this rule change is miniscule.

    6 pages of posts is 5.5 pages too many.
    I hate Tim Ruskell.
    User avatar
    Trrrroy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2869
    Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:24 am


  • Trrrroy wrote:
    JSeahawks wrote:
    Trrrroy wrote:So the new rule is essentially taking spearing, which has been illegal for years on the defensive side of the ball, and extending that over to the offense?


    Yes. But only if its in the open field.


    HOW UNREASONABLE!!! :sarcasm_off:

    Seriously, this rule change is miniscule.

    6 pages of posts is 5.5 pages too many.


    Exactly. I guess everything is going so well for the Seahawks this offseason people need something to bitch about.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18687
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • Mike Rob and Marshawn Lynch disgusted by the rule..

    Rob said Marshawn even said "I dont wanna play anymore"

    Live on Total access right now. Wow.
    User avatar
    Pstark3
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1428
    Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:08 pm
    Location: Bellevue


  • Pstark3 wrote:Mike Rob and Marshawn Lynch disgusted by the rule..

    Rob said Marshawn even said "I dont wanna play anymore"

    Live on Total access right now. Wow.


    I dont think i've ever seen Marshawn lead with the crown of his helmet. I'd be surprised if he drew a single flag next season. In hte open field he usually just uses his stiff arm or runs thru arm tackles.

    He did plant his facemask about 8 inches into Goldston's chest though.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18687
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • JSeahawks wrote:
    Pstark3 wrote:Mike Rob and Marshawn Lynch disgusted by the rule..

    Rob said Marshawn even said "I dont wanna play anymore"

    Live on Total access right now. Wow.


    I dont think i've ever seen Marshawn lead with the crown of his helmet. I'd be surprised if he drew a single flag next season.

    He did plant his facemask about 8 inches into Goldston's chest though.


    Mike Rob said that he was taught his whole life to deliver the blow, and not to accept it, and looking at this new rule, in real time, is gonna be extremely tough for power backs to deliver the blow when the defender is getting low
    User avatar
    Pstark3
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1428
    Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:08 pm
    Location: Bellevue


  • Pstark3 wrote:
    JSeahawks wrote:
    Pstark3 wrote:Mike Rob and Marshawn Lynch disgusted by the rule..

    Rob said Marshawn even said "I dont wanna play anymore"

    Live on Total access right now. Wow.


    I dont think i've ever seen Marshawn lead with the crown of his helmet. I'd be surprised if he drew a single flag next season.

    He did plant his facemask about 8 inches into Goldston's chest though.


    Mike Rob said that he was taught his whole life to deliver the blow, and not to accept it, and looking at this new rule, in real time, is gonna be extremely tough for power backs to deliver the blow when the defender is getting low


    I bet he was never taught to do it with his head down and lead with the top of his head.

    He can deliver the blow and run exactly how he has his whole career. There's nothing saying they can't lower their head to take on contact. Or even lower their head to initiate contact. Just do it with your head up like all football players are taught since middle school.
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18687
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • JSeahawks wrote:
    Pstark3 wrote:
    JSeahawks wrote:

    I dont think i've ever seen Marshawn lead with the crown of his helmet. I'd be surprised if he drew a single flag next season.

    He did plant his facemask about 8 inches into Goldston's chest though.


    Mike Rob said that he was taught his whole life to deliver the blow, and not to accept it, and looking at this new rule, in real time, is gonna be extremely tough for power backs to deliver the blow when the defender is getting low


    I bet he was never taught to do it with his head down and lead with the top of his head.

    He can deliver the blow and run exactly how he has his whole career. There's nothing saying they can't lower their head to take on contact. Or even lower their head to initiate contact. Just do it with your head up like all football players are taught since middle school.

    I understand that, but the problem comes from making these calls in real time. games can be decided way to easily by refs now IMHO
    User avatar
    Pstark3
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1428
    Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:08 pm
    Location: Bellevue


  • Pstark3 wrote:I understand that, but the problem comes from making these calls in real time. games can be decided way to easily by refs now IMHO


    I can see that side of the argument, but then we should be complaining about the officials, not about the rule. Its just part of the human part of sports and will always be there.

    IMO this rule will be a lot easier to see and call then holding or pass interference. I mean, a guy either leads with the top of his helmet in the open field or he doesnt. Its pretty cut and dry. There are ton of missed or botched holding calls everygame. There are tons of incorrectly called/or not called interference penalties. All in all, i think the impact of this rule will be very, very small on the game and be less then the impact of holding or PI.

    As for Marshaun saying he doesnt want to play anymore. I"m guessing once he thinks about his pay checks, and takes the time to understand the rule, he'll get over it. :)
    Image
    User avatar
    JSeahawks
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 18687
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:35 pm
    Location: Milwaukie, Oregon


  • This is just the league covering their ass, this will hardly ever get called. Like someone else said, it would have only been called 30 times all year. The only reason it's getting passed is so the league can say "we have rules against that!" if/when someone gets hurt while leading with the crown. It won't be an issue.
    Image
    User avatar
    AbsolutNET
    * NET X's & O's Guru *
     
    Posts: 8822
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 11:24 am
    Location: PNW


  • Would the hit Mike Rob delivered to Tim Jennings last year have been penalized? Rob put the crown of his helmet into Jennings shoulder in the open field, trucked that little guy, and broke his shoulder in a great open field play.

    We might have lost that game with this rule. Think about that.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11563
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Was he spearing with the helmet?

    If so then now days it will be called.
    Image
    User avatar
    Tech Worlds
    * Capt'n Dom *
    * Capt'n Dom *
     
    Posts: 9779
    Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
    Location: Granite Falls, WA


  • Scottemojo wrote:Would the hit Mike Rob delivered to Tim Jennings last year have been penalized? Rob put the crown of his helmet into Jennings shoulder in the open field, trucked that little guy, and broke his shoulder in a great open field play.

    We might have lost that game with this rule. Think about that.


    Yes, that play was there prime highlight on espn.
    CPHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2252
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm


  • JSeahawks wrote:I can see that side of the argument, but then we should be complaining about the officials, not about the rule. Its just part of the human part of sports and will always be there.


    And because of that, the league should not be passing rules that make even more of the game subject to judgement calls by officials, but that is exactly what they are doing.

    I hate to quote Jerome Bettis but I think he hit the nail on the head this morning:

    “We’re creating so many plays that are subjective for the referee, that before you know it the referee controls the outcome of the game because these calls can go either way, and then the referees start taking too prominent of a role in deciding the outcome of the game."

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/21/jerome-bettis-says-nfls-new-helmet-rule-makes-no-sense/
    User avatar
    Shadowhawk
    * NET Staff Alumni *
    * NET Staff Alumni *
     
    Posts: 1305
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:05 am


  • Just using the "helmet as a weapon" will be called outside of the tackles. It doesn't have to be a helmet to helmet thing, just the RB using his helmet to lower the boom on a guy. Can't wait for the first RB to keep his head up and take a helmet to the jaw.
    CPHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2252
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm


PreviousNext


It is currently Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:36 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information