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

Greenhell

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,539
Reaction score
53
DericLee":1icg6j8p said:
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.
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
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.
 

The Outfield

New member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
2,547
Reaction score
0
Scottemojo":sx0iqih8 said:
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...
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
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.
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
The Outfield":2my64bko said:
Scottemojo":2my64bko said:
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.
 

Blitzer88

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
12,820
Reaction score
0
Location
Seattle, WA
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.
 

McG

Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
961
Reaction score
0
Location
Wichita, Kansas
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.
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
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.
 

12th_Bob

Active member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
1,964
Reaction score
15
Three rule changes, all would of most likely changed the outcome of Seattle games. (Kicking rule, crown helmet rule, and down block lineman rule)

Smells like rotten BS.
 

MontanaHawk05

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,886
Reaction score
404
Another transparent attempt to turn the NFL into a pure passing league. I'm amazed by their ingenuity.
 

Cartire

New member
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
4,580
Reaction score
0
Scottemojo":1n9re9n9 said:
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.

So actually, its been reported that when they did their homework on this, they took every game from week 10 and week 16 and watched ever single play.
They said there was 5 cases in week 10 and 6 in week 16 that would be penalties.

Doing the math, there is about 130 plays in a game from both sides. week 10 had 14 games playing due to bye's. Week 16 had 16 games.

- so 30 games had an average of 3900 plays where 11 of them were deemed penalized for a ball carrier leading with his crown. I dont know what plays they deemed bad, so I looked up the injury reports for week 10 and week 16. Nobody was injured due to a ball carrier ramming them.

-So in 0.2% of plays in those two weeks, someone rammed with their head and nobody got hurt. Better make a rule for it........
 

Shadowhawk

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
1,513
Reaction score
0
Cartire":1fg13ajy said:
Scottemojo":1fg13ajy said:
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.

So actually, its been reported that when they did their homework on this, they took every game from week 10 and week 16 and watched ever single play.
They said there was 5 cases in week 10 and 6 in week 16 that would be penalties.

Doing the math, there is about 130 plays in a game from both sides. week 10 had 14 games playing due to bye's. Week 16 had 16 games.

- so 30 games had an average of 3900 plays where 11 of them were deemed penalized for a ball carrier leading with his crown. I dont know what plays they deemed bad, so I looked up the injury reports for week 10 and week 16. Nobody was injured due to a ball carrier ramming them.

-So in 0.2% of plays in those two weeks, someone rammed with their head and nobody got hurt. Better make a rule for it........

And that's the opinion of people looking at game film after the fact. The number of flags that would have ACTUALLY been thrown would almost certainly be much higher.
 

Happypuppy

New member
Joined
Sep 4, 2010
Messages
1,975
Reaction score
0
Scottemojo":2k60r9lx said:
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.

Exactly. Those that blame the NFLPA don't. It's the owners afraid of concussions and the resulting law suits
 

Shadowhawk

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
1,513
Reaction score
0
Scottemojo":1eee7699 said:
The Outfield":1eee7699 said:
Scottemojo":1eee7699 said:
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.

This. Exactly. Not only free from bias, but a lot faster.
 

Cartire

New member
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
4,580
Reaction score
0
Shadowhawk":1nchag08 said:
Scottemojo":1nchag08 said:
The Outfield":1nchag08 said:
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.

This. Exactly. Not only free from bias, but a lot faster.

EXACTLY. With todays tv coverage and the speed they can rewatch plays, I dont understand why they cant just have someone dedicated to rewatching plays right after they happen and slow action plays down to quickly determine the proper outcome. They can handle this while the players are in huddle, and send a call down to the ref if they can reverse a blown call. The clock would be stopped for a bit anyway if its a flag, so you dont have to worry about hurry up offenses going too fast.

They only need to call-down during flags, and they'll have the time to help the field crew with the correct call. No ref running to the replay booth. They can talk it over on the field (which they do anyways) why the guy upstairs watches the film. Sends his verdict down. And in all honesty, it wouldnt even be used on obvious calls. Offsides, False starts, obvious interferences, the ref can just make the call on the field quickly. But timing calls, personal fouls, intentional grounding, should always be reviewed quickly upstairs with a verdict within 30 seconds.
 
OP
OP
D

Darrenv17

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
197
Reaction score
0
Location
new york,ny
Teqneek":34ewvaap said:
Can we wait till the rule passes before we post completely false information? In no article I read could I even come to half a conclusion that rule was passed yesterday.

It is being voted on today.



read again!!!
 

Fuzzman55

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,604
Reaction score
0
MontanaHawk05":3uwor1o3 said:
Another transparent attempt to turn the NFL into a pure passing league. I'm amazed by their ingenuity.

Good point. I hadn't even considered that angle.

I hold nothing but contempt for those that made this rule possible.
 

Cartire

New member
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Messages
4,580
Reaction score
0
Fuzzman55":3cawas4e said:
MontanaHawk05":3cawas4e said:
Another transparent attempt to turn the NFL into a pure passing league. I'm amazed by their ingenuity.

Good point. I hadn't even considered that angle.

I hold nothing but contempt for those that made this rule possible.

Paul Allen was one of the people that voted yes for it. Im conflicted.
 
Top