The rule changes

[Storm]

No more Tuck Rule = good, you lose the football as a quarterback, you fucking fumbled.

 

Running backs can no longer lower their helmets to lay down the wood outside the tackle box or past the LOS. What kind of fucking bullshit is that?

 

Couple of my favorite tweets about it:

 

Justin Forsett:

 

So I'm guessing I'm going to have to find ways to strengthen my chin now lol

 

Seriously, has anyone in the NFL competition committee actually ever played football or even tried to lower their shoulder without lowering their head? They're changing the entire process of running the football....and they are going to see a lot MORE injuries to running backs who are running straight up and down like sticks, afraid to hit anybody.

 

 

Fred Jackson

 

I'm not Sliding!!

 

 

Harrison Smith

 

Soon everyone will get a trophy for participation

 

 

Jennings 141

 

Football will be destroyed because of "player safety" rules. “@davis_winkie: @Jennings141 anynews on thepossible ruleto protect us snappers?

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000152290/article/nfl-players-react-on-twitter-to-crownofthehelmet-rule

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

Jesus...the only reason why if I was a running back I would not try to ram down someone with my helmet is the fear of getting my neck broke. Other than that you are going to see more sideline to sideline runners reminiscent of Franco Harris...Mr. Avoid Contact At All Costs...

[Storm]

Jesus...the only reason why if I was a running back I would not try to ram down someone with my helmet is the fear of getting my neck broke. Other than that you are going to see more sideline to sideline runners reminiscent of Franco Harris...Mr. Avoid Contact At All Costs...

 

They are taking away what makes football, football. Then again, if they don't act now, the current crop of players who are bitching about this rule change NOW will be suing them when they go to retire 6 or 7 years DOWN THE LINE.....

[Storm]

Emmitt Smith is a douche, but I've always had the utmost respect for the style with which he ran the ball. So when the NFL's all-time leading running back is telling you look fucking foolish, it's time to take a step back from the Safety-Colored glasses.

 

 

“As a running back, it’s almost impossible (to not lower your head),” Emmitt Smith, the NFL’s all-time leading rusher, said earlier this week. “The first thing you do is get behind your shoulder pads. That means you’re leaning forward and the first part of contact that’s going to take place is your head, regardless.

“I disagree with the rule altogether. It doesn’t make any sense for that position. It sounds like it’s been made up by people who have never played the game of football.”

[Storm]

I can't even imagine how many fumbles there are going to be since a big part of protecting the ball is hunching over it, with your lower body behind your head and shoulders and your momentum carrying you forward. A guy running straight up is going to get himself hurt....and he's also not going to be gaining a lot of yardage or breaking any tackles.

[Storm]

This will be made as big as, if not a bigger deal than the scab-ref debacle last season. Mark my words. And in all likelihood, they will have to deal with it for several seasons before they realize they are causing more injuries and not seeing any significant differences in concussions.

[Blindgreed1]

First thing I thought of was sideline to sideline running (which immeadiately triggered my narcolepsy). Second thing that came to mind was goal line fumbles. Defense can't lead with the helmet. Offense can't lead with the helmet. I Guess they'll just go out and play grab ass for 3 hours moving forward?

[Sephiroth]

I may seriously stop watching football.

 

We've had the fucking Brady rule, the defenseless receiver rule, the in the grasp rule, and the leading with the helmet rule... and now this?

 

Fuck it, this isn't football.

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

First thing I thought of was sideline to sideline running (which immeadiately triggered my narcolepsy). Second thing that came to mind was goal line fumbles. Defense can't lead with the helmet. Offense can't lead with the helmet. I Guess they'll just go out and play grab ass for 3 hours moving forward?

 

Don't know if you are old enough bro to remember Franco Harris. Outside of Pittsburgh he was derided for his avoidance of contact. My Old Man called him Mr. Sidelines

[Storm]

I may seriously stop watching football.

 

We've had the fucking Brady rule, the defenseless receiver rule, the in the grasp rule, and the leading with the helmet rule... and now this?

 

Fuck it, this isn't football.

 

They gave the Brady "Tuck" Rule the ole "our bad" and everyone's like, "the Raiders have to feel good about this, even if 11 years later"....or however many years it was....but I would bet the Raiders are more like, "FUCK! Now no one else will ever be epicly fucked out of a potential playoff push to the Super Bowl!"

[Blindgreed1]

Don't know if you are old enough bro to remember Franco Harris. Outside of Pittsburgh he was derided for his avoidance of contact. My Old Man called him Mr. Sidelines

Yeah, I remember Franco. Buddy of mine brought up Jim Brown yesterday too though. He never led with the helmet and didn't avoid contact, so maybe there's hope???

[gmenroc]

No more QB dives I guess...

[CrazedDogs]

The rule does not actually say that a running back can't lower his head, he just can't deliver a blow with the crown of his helmet.

 

How they'll tell the difference, I have no idea, but on paper the rule doesn't really change anything of substance. Nobody should be using their head as a weapon, on defense or offense.

[Storm]

The rule does not actually say that a running back can't lower his head, he just can't deliver a blow with the crown of his helmet.

 

How they'll tell the difference, I have no idea, but on paper the rule doesn't really change anything of substance. Nobody should be using their head as a weapon, on defense or offense.

 

Did you watch the video? There's only one in which that actually happened and it was Trent Richardson's. The other 4 they claim were situations in which it would be called would be complete judgement calls and nothing egregious even occurs. There's one where incidental contact gets a guy shaken up, I think it was a Lions player and I'm sure the fact he got hurt had a lot to do with that one being included. I think you will definitely see penalties called on running backs doing what is innate of the position.

[Treehugger]

It's ridiculous. What they should address is an offensive player being able to grab/stiffarm a defender's facemask (The A.P. Method) because that's totally unfair.

[MakeMeSomeFoodHo]

refs are in for an even tougher season than usual.

[Blindgreed1]

refs are in for an even tougher season than usual.

They had half the season off last year so it seems fair to me.

[Storm]

It's just weird to me that 2/3rds of the focus of this years competition committee was on getting rid of rules that were shady and subjective only to turn around and quickly create another one they will have to get rid of 11 years from now.

[Steitzenhaus]

Isn't it only going to apply for hits outside the tackle box? I'd like to know how many hits from last year would now be penalized with the rule change. I heard a clip from Colin Cowherd earlier during the week and he said it was only 6 plays but that seems very low.

[Storm]

Isn't it only going to apply for hits outside the tackle box? I'd like to know how many hits from last year would now be penalized with the rule change. I heard a clip from Colin Cowherd earlier during the week and he said it was only 6 plays but that seems very low.

 

I heard 5, so it's around that number but since it will be a subjective, judgement call, I'm willing to bet the number of times it will actually be called will be way greater than that. Regardless if it's outside the tackle box and down the field, you're making a drastic change to the way the game is played, trying to eliminate 5 plays by eliminating a running-style that virtually all running backs utilize at some point during the game....

[CrazedDogs]

I heard 5, so it's around that number but since it will be a subjective, judgement call, I'm willing to bet the number of times it will actually be called will be way greater than that. Regardless if it's outside the tackle box and down the field, you're making a drastic change to the way the game is played, trying to eliminate 5 plays by eliminating a running-style that virtually all running backs utilize at some point during the game....

 

Eh, I agree that its a lame rule, but you're really over-dramatizing it.

 

All running backs use it? You sure about that? We're talking about a tactic whereby the running back, or anyone really, gives themselves up specifically to make a play-ending impact with the crown of the helmet. I've very rarely seen that done by an offensive player. All this is, is basically a clarification and expansion of the old spearing rules.

[GorillaNJ]

Have they said what the penalty will be? Is it going to be a 15 yard penalty from the spot of the ball... from the start of the play?

 

Can you see some slick CB's trying to initiate that sort of contact from RB's? On a big play it would almost make sense to stay tall on a tackle and let that RB take you out!

[Storm]

Eh, I agree that its a lame rule, but you're really over-dramatizing it.

 

All running backs use it? You sure about that? We're talking about a tactic whereby the running back, or anyone really, gives themselves up specifically to make a play-ending impact with the crown of the helmet. I've very rarely seen that done by an offensive player. All this is, is basically a clarification and expansion of the old spearing rules.

 

I'm simply repeating the position of many prominent professional running backs, bro. Ya know, the guys who would know what the position requires and remember how they were taught to run the football.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000156139/article/ray-rice-crownofhelmet-rule-wont-change-my-game

[BlueInCanada]

I think it was that Mike Periera or whatever the big boss of the NFL refs and stuff that said if you look back on the 2012 season that only about 20 some odd clear cut plays out of the year would of been flagged from this "no leading with the crown rule" outside of the tackle box.

 

So 20 plays out of the thousands that are run a season, I mean if that's it in all honesty then I really don't see that big of a deal.

 

It's funny too all these RBs making a big stink about it, I don't think a single one is known for lowering their head and running over someone.

 

The last RB that I've seen do it was Jacobs and he'll be lucky to touch the field with his knee problems.

[Storm]

I think it was that Mike Periera or whatever the big boss of the NFL refs and stuff that said if you look back on the 2012 season that only about 20 some odd clear cut plays out of the year would of been flagged from this "no leading with the crown rule" outside of the tackle box.

 

So 20 plays out of the thousands that are run a season, I mean if that's it in all honesty then I really don't see that big of a deal.

 

It's funny too all these RBs making a big stink about it, I don't think a single one is known for lowering their head and running over someone.

 

The last RB that I've seen do it was Jacobs and he'll be lucky to touch the field with his knee problems.

 

It's the fact that if you lower your shoulder pad level, your head drops with it, regardless. That's natural, that's definitely how all running backs run the football. Then comes in the subjectivity of the rule. To my knowledge, no running back has that style. But since every running back unquestionably lowers his shoulder pad level to absorb blows, and the rule's subjectivity, how many touchy calls are going to come out of this? That's the point. So while there are 20 (the number was actually 6, such a small number that it doesn't even warrant a rule, anyway) that could have got this penalty, there are going to be much, much more than 20 actually called this coming season, due extensively to the fact that this penalty isn't clear-cut whatsoever, and is left up to the refs on the fly.

 

Now, it's not that there are running backs out there that plow forward with their eyes looking directly at the ground, torso parallel to the ground about to battering ram people to death, like what seems to be the argument in this thread, lol. The original helmet-to-helmet and defenseless receiver penalties are questionable enough as it is and routinely generate penalties that probably shouldn't be penalties when the receiver is simply bracing for impact and the defender hits him. So what happens now when the running back lowers his pad level and pops another player in the helmet when said player tries to get low enough to tackle him? See, that's the defenders freaking JOB! To get their pad level lower than the running backs, but now, now they get a cop out for piss-poor tackling and technique if the running back happens to pop him in the helmet.