well they pass the new rule leading with crown...
- Thread starter Darrenv17
- Start date
Cartire
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,580
- Reaction score
- 0
Bakergirl":1aj7w1sv said:
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.
Hawknballs
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2013
- Messages
- 4,430
- Reaction score
- 837
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".
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".
Cartire":3n4jyr77 said:
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.
Cartire
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,580
- Reaction score
- 0
Bakergirl":o322nhf1 said:
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.
nwgamer
New member
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:
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:
CANHawk
New member
Bakergirl":wak5rv3p said:
Yeah, most successful business people tend to completely ignore the wishes of their clients. Seems like a good business practice...
therealjohncarlson
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
- Messages
- 4,471
- Reaction score
- 294
Bakergirl":wj0ag2px said:
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.
nwgamer
New member
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.
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.
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
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?Bakergirl":1nfj2xmr said:
Cartire
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,580
- Reaction score
- 0
nwgamer":2hkwjim3 said:
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.
Teqneek":3t2hzvpp said:themunn":3t2hzvpp said:sa_seahawker":3t2hzvpp said:
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:
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)
kidhawk
Well-known member
Bakergirl":8fo1u0oq said:
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).
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
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.CANHawk":379reskz said:
therealjohncarlson
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
- Messages
- 4,471
- Reaction score
- 294
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.
Cartire
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,580
- Reaction score
- 0
Hawkfan77":18j90aoj said:
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.
Cartire
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,580
- Reaction score
- 0
themunn":1jzfclqx said:
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.
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
HawkFan72
Active member
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.
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.
Similar threads
