NFL: NFL rule changes

jbindm

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2010
13,073
7,605
113
Des Moines
Rescinding the tuck rule was long overdue, anyway (about 12 or 13 years overdue if you're a Raiders fan).

I'm on the fence about the leading with the crown of the helmet penalty. On one hand, it makes sense that if defensive players can't lead with their helmets, then why should offensive players be able to? But for running backs, especially violent downhill runners like AP, this has to be a concern. I guess we'll have to see how it's going to be called.
 

3TrueFans

Just a Happily Married Man
Sep 10, 2009
63,146
61,714
113
Ames
There should be a way to penalize offensive players for dangerous hits and plays just like they can penalize defensive players.
 

Tailg8er

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2011
7,818
4,682
113
38
Johnston
Someone I know posted on FB yesterday that now it's illegal to make a blind side block also. (even if your head is in front of the guy & it's an otherwise legal block)

Anyone else see that anywhere? I haven't had a chance to look it up. If it's true, I definitely don't like this one. Part of football is keeping your head on a swivel so that doesn't happen to you!
 

kberyldial

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2006
1,265
58
48
All you need to know about the helmet rule is that the NFL cannot prevent head injury. They can only create a perception that they are proactive about head injury. When you have guys that big that can run that fast there is no rule that can prevent concussions. It is and always has been a part of the game. They aren't willing to admit that even casually for sake of litigation. That's all this is about. They would be better off agreeing to take some of the billions - pay the veterans insurance or pay them out with a stip that they cannot sue. Then they can leave the game as is which is what the consumer wants. No helmet - rule - or lack of rule will EVER stop head trauma. The worst part of this rule is that it is reviewable. Lovely.
 

3TrueFans

Just a Happily Married Man
Sep 10, 2009
63,146
61,714
113
Ames
Someone I know posted on FB yesterday that now it's illegal to make a blind side block also. (even if your head is in front of the guy & it's an otherwise legal block)

Anyone else see that anywhere? I haven't had a chance to look it up. If it's true, I definitely don't like this one. Part of football is keeping your head on a swivel so that doesn't happen to you!
No peel back blocks below the waste
 

VeloClone

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2010
48,022
38,587
113
Brooklyn Park, MN
Rescinding the tuck rule was long overdue, anyway (about 12 or 13 years overdue if you're a Raiders fan).

I'm on the fence about the leading with the crown of the helmet penalty. On one hand, it makes sense that if defensive players can't lead with their helmets, then why should offensive players be able to? But for running backs, especially violent downhill runners like AP, this has to be a concern. I guess we'll have to see how it's going to be called.


Either leading with the helmet is dangerous or it isn't. If it is dangerous, disallow it. If it isn't let all of the players do it. Running backs need to lead with their shoulder just like everyone else has to.
 

BringBackJohnny

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2009
1,024
379
83
37
Ames
As a Raiders fan thank goodness the tuck rule is gone. That call might have been worse than the Phantom Three in the Phog......

Have a strong dislike of officials
 

ricochet

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2008
1,893
1,371
113
Below the waist I can understand. He just made this sound like any crack back type block where a guy isn't looking.

I think a couple years ago they did ban these if it is away from the play, but maybe only on change of possession plays like fumbles and interceptions. Ones like the Warren Sapp hit that broke Chad Clifton's hip a few years back. I think there was another specific one more recently that prompted the rule change.
 

Mr Janny

Welcome to the Office of Secret Intelligence
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
Mar 27, 2006
42,648
33,521
113
All you need to know about the helmet rule is that the NFL cannot prevent head injury. They can only create a perception that they are proactive about head injury. When you have guys that big that can run that fast there is no rule that can prevent concussions. It is and always has been a part of the game. They aren't willing to admit that even casually for sake of litigation. That's all this is about. They would be better off agreeing to take some of the billions - pay the veterans insurance or pay them out with a stip that they cannot sue. Then they can leave the game as is which is what the consumer wants. No helmet - rule - or lack of rule will EVER stop head trauma. The worst part of this rule is that it is reviewable. Lovely.

agreed that this has more to do with litigation defense than player safety. I disagree on the bolded part. NFL ratings are doing just fine since the league started implementing these new "safety" rules. Anyone making the "they're killing the game" argument ought to mention it to the record number of people watching every Sunday. Apparently they don't know about it.
 

Rabbuk

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2011
56,961
46,113
113
I knocked a kid out in high school freshman year peel back blocking on a punt return. I understand the rule.
 

IcSyU

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2007
28,280
6,911
113
Now if they'd just outlaw stiff arms to the helmet since you can get flagged for illegal hands to the face we'd be getting somewhere.

And the article I read yesterday where it said, "You can't put your pad level down without dropping your head." Uhhhh yeah you can...we had to do so every time we went in for a tackle in high school or coach was on our ***.
 

kberyldial

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2006
1,265
58
48
agreed that this has more to do with litigation defense than player safety. I disagree on the bolded part. NFL ratings are doing just fine since the league started implementing these new "safety" rules. Anyone making the "they're killing the game" argument ought to mention it to the record number of people watching every Sunday. Apparently they don't know about it.

I for one do not want more replays, especially on collisions between running backs and defenders at the line of scrimmage! I'm not saying interest in the NFL is waning or will continue to wane. However, they aren't making the game the safer. They are only muddying the waters for officials that already have to huddle on nearly every penalty. The perception that NFL players are safer is all the league and the owners are interested in. The consumer could care less. The players quite frankly could care less. That's not to say I think guys should be getting blown up on crossing routes. I'm only saying that when you have men that size that run that fast - NO penalty or rule makes the game safer. It only means there are more opportunities for arbitrary flags and more game stoppage. I'll still watch.
 

Rural

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2010
42,333
35,464
113
Just another rule that means football is on the way out.