It's official: Tuck rule gone, helmet rule approved

Shadowhawk":3it9c9pz said:

JSeahawks":3it9c9pz said:

Upon review of every single play last year (not by me, by the rules committee) this penalty would have been called less then 30 times last season.

Click to expand...

Actually no, all they determined is that after reviewing video of every play last year, there were 30 plays in which it would have been the correct call. When you factor in officials' mistakes while working games in real time, I'd be willing to better the number of flags that would have been thrown had this rule existed last year would easily be 2 to 3 times that amount.

It's easy for the league to sit back now and say "this isn't going to happen that often." But officials make mistakes and plays happen fast and they are going to err on the side of throwing the flag if a play looks bad. Look at the Chancellor hit last year: three flags came flying in on a play that was obviously clean once people saw the replay. The same thing will happen with this rule.

Click to expand...

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

el capitan":bo7kgcil said:

I don't understand what being outside the tackle box has to do with player safety.
Is it not possible to suffer a concussion if you stay between the tackles?

Click to expand...

I think it's the magnitude of the impact. Would you rather tackle a helmet coming at you with a 3-yard head start or a 30-yard head start? It seems the injuries could go up if a player is allowed to build momentum and speed, then collide with the defender like a missile.

In the open field the ball carrier has many choices, in a crammed space with multiple 300-pound linemen all around, the choices are limited. They aren't saying concussions won't happen, but that the rule will penalize the ball carrier who has many choices and still chooses the most potentially harmful one.

About fricking time. I can't believe it took this long to ban offensive spearing. It is the one thing I could never understand is why the ball carrier could lead with his head. My personal opinion is that there is an outrage because most people don't understand the rule and are ignorant on the subject. If it where me I would ban all forms of offensive spearing especially inside the tackles. Keep your head up, forward body lean and run hard.

JSeahawks":6t9mvkci said:

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

Click to expand...

Um, no, what I am saying is that just because the league only found 30 instances in which the rule could have legitimately been called last year, that doesn't mean that it would have only been flagged 30 times and probably would have been called many more times than that.

And what's the basis of your assertion that this is an easier call to make than others? Considering how badly officials have blown roughing and defenseless receiver calls, I don't believe that they'll do any better with this call. They will see the runner's head and shoulders drop, they'll see his helmet hit the defender trying to stop him, and it's my opinion that they will likely throw the flag at this point even if the runner didn't hit the defender with the crown of his helmet. When you combine the speed of the game with the fact that the official likely wont get a perfect look at the hit, I think they could easily jump to the wrong conclusion.

Let me ask you a question: what if this rule had been in effect last year and a flag had been thrown on Lynch's TD run against the 49ers because he knocked helmets with Goldson on the way into the end zone? How would you feel about the rule then?

This is a bad rule IMHO because it's another judgement call. The NFL is putting more of the game in the officials' hands instead of the players' hands.

Pete Carroll on the rule change:

“It’s a challenging proposal in that it’s for the officials to determine whether there was intent,” Carroll said. “We feel as coaches that it’s going to be very challenging for those guys to call. But it’s a good move to teach football players of all levels how to not lead with their helmets.”

Carroll also said that he’s not worried about the rule change altering the game of Marshawn Lynch, who rushed for a career-high 1,590 yards last season.

“He’s a mixture, a very unique talent in the way he plays,” Carroll said. “But he is not a guy that definitely leads with his helmet all the time.”

Click to expand...

Fudwamper":2wbndpgl said:

My personal opinion is that there is an outrage because most people don't understand the rule and are ignorant on the subject.

Click to expand...

Actually, I think most people understand the subject and the rule very clearly. They just don't think this is something that officials will be able to call effectively and anticipate a lot of penalties called incorrectly on plays that are still legal, just like we see every week with roughing the passer penalties and hits on defenseless receivers.

Meanwhile, Marshawn just retweeted this video:

[youtube]vlv6BrrxD_4[/youtube]

5280Hawk":2anog5fv said:

Look, It wasn't even close, the OWNERS voted it in 31-1 That includes our best pal Paul.

In the article it says its the crown of the helmet, think the top halo ring tha can't be used to hit another player. The facemask and "hair line" will not be called.

Doesnt sound that bad, and it will keep guys healthy.

Click to expand...

You mean a series of minor rule changes isn't going to catastrophically alter the nature of the most popular and profitable sport in America?

Shadowhawk":5hoxk0uf said:

Fudwamper":5hoxk0uf said:

My personal opinion is that there is an outrage because most people don't understand the rule and are ignorant on the subject.

Click to expand...

Actually, I think most people understand the subject and the rule very clearly. They just don't think this is something that officials will be able to call effectively and anticipate a lot of penalties called incorrectly on plays that are still legal, just like we see every week with roughing the passer penalties and hits on defenseless receivers.

Click to expand...

THIS is the take I can get behind. Well said. Whether it's the "most" people or just the loudest, I think Fud might be referring to the ones who say "ruining the game" without any elaboration, or the ones with the "two-hand touch" snippy comments and that's it. I don't get that argument, because that's the way I was taught to play – to keep your crown clean and learn how to use everything else (shoulders, forearms, hands, even facemask) to get it done.

But officials' subjectivity is probably the only thing I don't like about the game, so I can see the ire for bringing in a new subjective rule. It's all going to be in the application. IF, like some people say, this is all because of lawsuits and PR, then maybe it will be enough just to have the rule on the books and refs will be told to use that ruling very sparingly. On the other hand, they might try to make an example out of some guys early and get carried away with it. The behind-the-scenes emphasis that the league delivers to the officials will determine how prevalent it is.

Shadowhawk":31qz1hfr said:

JSeahawks":31qz1hfr said:

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question: what if this rule had been in effect last year and a flag had been thrown on Lynch's TD run against the 49ers because he knocked helmets with Goldson on the way into the end zone? How would you feel about the rule then?
.

Click to expand...

I'd be fine with it. Bad calls happen. Move on to the next play. I've never been one to complain about officiating.

JSeahawks":37fd91u4 said:

Shadowhawk":37fd91u4 said:

JSeahawks":37fd91u4 said:

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question: what if this rule had been in effect last year and a flag had been thrown on Lynch's TD run against the 49ers because he knocked helmets with Goldson on the way into the end zone? How would you feel about the rule then?
.

Click to expand...

I'd be fine with it. Bad calls happen. Move on to the next play. I've never been one to complain about officiating.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad to hear that, because we are going to get burned by more than a few bad calls because of this rule.

It should be pretty simple for the refs to see if, outside the tackle box, in a one on one situation, the runner lowers his head and spears the defensive opponent with the crown of his helmet. Much easier to call than a helmet to helmet on a defenseless receiver IMO. I'm sure there'll be instances of it being called incorrectly, but I highly doubt it's going to have a serious, negative impact on the game. People just love to have a freak out.

Shadowhawk":p36r799x said:

JSeahawks":p36r799x said:

Shadowhawk":p36r799x said:

JSeahawks said:

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question: what if this rule had been in effect last year and a flag had been thrown on Lynch's TD run against the 49ers because he knocked helmets with Goldson on the way into the end zone? How would you feel about the rule then?
.

Click to expand...

I'd be fine with it. Bad calls happen. Move on to the next play. I've never been one to complain about officiating.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad to hear that, because we are going to get burned by more than a few bad calls because of this rule.

Click to expand...

So will other teams. Bad calls even out over time

Tech Worlds":1rin3y13 said:

Shadowhawk":1rin3y13 said:

JSeahawks":1rin3y13 said:

Shadowhawk said:

JSeahawks said:

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question: what if this rule had been in effect last year and a flag had been thrown on Lynch's TD run against the 49ers because he knocked helmets with Goldson on the way into the end zone? How would you feel about the rule then?
.

Click to expand...

I'd be fine with it. Bad calls happen. Move on to the next play. I've never been one to complain about officiating.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad to hear that, because we are going to get burned by more than a few bad calls because of this rule.

Click to expand...

So will other teams. Bad calls even out over time

Click to expand...

Yes, but the league should be taking steps to limit bad calls, not implement rules that will increase the number of bad calls even if all of the teams get equally screwed.

Shadowhawk":2qnsxwgh said:

Tech Worlds":2qnsxwgh said:

Shadowhawk":2qnsxwgh said:

JSeahawks said:

Shadowhawk said:

JSeahawks said:

So we should just have no rules because officials make mistakes? This rule seems much easier and obvious to call/or not call then holding or pass interference.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question: what if this rule had been in effect last year and a flag had been thrown on Lynch's TD run against the 49ers because he knocked helmets with Goldson on the way into the end zone? How would you feel about the rule then?
.

Click to expand...

I'd be fine with it. Bad calls happen. Move on to the next play. I've never been one to complain about officiating.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad to hear that, because we are going to get burned by more than a few bad calls because of this rule.

Click to expand...

So will other teams. Bad calls even out over time

Click to expand...

Yes, but the league should be taking steps to limit bad calls, not implement rules that will increase the number of bad calls even if all of the teams get equally screwed.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily, if a greater need outweighs the need to minimize erroneous penalties. The particular contact prohibited in this rule is particularly dangerous and potentially catastrophic, and is a good way to become quadriplegic. If you don't buy the safety angle, then think in terms of money : failing to ban it leaves the nfl open to lawsuits on the subject when someone gets hurt.

jkitsune":1stu9xgf said:

Not necessarily, if a greater need outweighs the need to minimize erroneous penalties. The particular contact prohibited in this rule is particularly dangerous and potentially catastrophic, and is a good way to become quadriplegic. If you don't buy the safety angle, then think in terms of money : failing to ban it leaves the nfl open to lawsuits on the subject when someone gets hurt.

Click to expand...

I know the physics of what happens when you take a hard enough blow straight down from the crown of your head, but I would argue that this rule actually has a detrimental effect on player safety. How many football players have been paralyzed due to hitting someone with the crown of his helmet? I can think of three: Dennis Byrd in 1992, Curtis Williams in 2000, and Eric LeGrand in 2010. (Mike Utley broke his neck in 1991 but that was due to an awkward fall after a missed block, not hitting someone with the crown of his helmet.) I don't minimize or make light of those incidents, but that is three cases in years, decades worth of seasons, games and hits.

On the other hand, this rule negatively impacts player safety in regards to the lower body. First, if backs are focusing on keeping their heads up, they are going to run higher as a result. That leaves their lower bodies more vulnerable. Since defenders are going to try to go low on ball carriers for reasons of leverage, if the ball carrier is running higher that means defenders are going to have a clear shot at their legs. Knee injuries are already frighteningly common and if running backs can't go low to protect themselves, we're going to see more knee injuries as a result. (And I know that Jeff Fisher and others came out and said that backs would be able to go low to protect themselves without a penalty, but it's going to get called.)

Dennis Byrd's example as mentioned above is illustrative because he did not intend to lead with the crown of his helmet on the play when he was paralyzed. In his autobiography, he says that he held his head up until the last second, but when he saw teammate Scott Mersereau coming at him he instinctively ducked. Even if backs focus on keeping their heads up, there are situations when they will duck their heads because of pure instinct. So there is no way this rule change will eliminate hits with the crown of the helmet.

This is a rule that looks good on paper but is going to prove to be very bad in real life. It's not going to keep players from leading with the crown of their helmets and it's going to lead to an increase in knee and other lower body injuries.

HawkAroundTheClock":18xpb6b6 said:

Shadowhawk":18xpb6b6 said:

Fudwamper":18xpb6b6 said:

My personal opinion is that there is an outrage because most people don't understand the rule and are ignorant on the subject.

Click to expand...

Actually, I think most people understand the subject and the rule very clearly. They just don't think this is something that officials will be able to call effectively and anticipate a lot of penalties called incorrectly on plays that are still legal, just like we see every week with roughing the passer penalties and hits on defenseless receivers.

Click to expand...

THIS is the take I can get behind. Well said. Whether it's the "most" people or just the loudest, I think Fud might be referring to the ones who say "ruining the game" without any elaboration, or the ones with the "two-hand touch" snippy comments and that's it. I don't get that argument, because that's the way I was taught to play – to keep your crown clean and learn how to use everything else (shoulders, forearms, hands, even facemask) to get it done.

But officials' subjectivity is probably the only thing I don't like about the game, so I can see the ire for bringing in a new subjective rule. It's all going to be in the application. IF, like some people say, this is all because of lawsuits and PR, then maybe it will be enough just to have the rule on the books and refs will be told to use that ruling very sparingly. On the other hand, they might try to make an example out of some guys early and get carried away with it. The behind-the-scenes emphasis that the league delivers to the officials will determine how prevalent it is.

Click to expand...

That is what I was getting at. It is an easy call to make. Lower your head in a spearing fashion coming through the line at a safety or DB and get called for spearing. Really that is all this rule is doing. Enforcing offensive spearing.

The NFL's equivalent to the "charging" foul. I'm over it.

I like the rule. Player safety is important. I know people are worried about the definition of contact sports and the entertainment value. Eventually the player has through live through suffering from brain disease or other life long injuries where there is no fan there to help. Not all players make millions and given the Market everyone wants younger players. Once you age you keep suffering. No one deserves a life like that just for a moment of fame. Commonsensical rules that protect players from neck and head injuries needs to be in place. That's my strong opinion. All teams will have to abide by them, so they will all adapt. The argument that it will be called wrongly can happen to both teams, so doesn't make sense to be upset?

Officials get the "tackle box" thing wrong a lot already on intentional grounding calls. This will be no different. Just more likely of seeing flags fly when we hear helmet to helmet contact.