Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Yeah, I don't think you have much of a clue what lessens any injury if you think they are proposing a rule that opens them up to more injury.You don't seem to understand here...nor have you actually studied it...but k eep trying.
And there is a reason boxing is now an afterthought in American sports.
Nobody cared huh?Inform me of why Chuck Cecil was on the cover of SI called "too vicious for the NFL"? And why he wore the Kelso helmet...and why he retired due to concussions?Ill hang up and listen.If nobody cared...why was he fined over and over and over by the NFL?
OR do both...because the helmet alone won't prevent things.And yeah, some of this came up a few years ago in GB when Rodgers went to the different helmet...some think it looks funny.
What matters more, looks, or player safety? Longer games with more whistles for penalties allowing more commercial time or natural instincts when running and trying to protect yourself and being the hitter rather than the hittee?
I agree safety matters more...and you won't see an instance of me saying that they should not mandate the new helmet.I just don't think they should stop at just that as some of you appear to.As for longer games with more whistles...do games last longer or shorter when they have to attend to guys half out of it laying on the field?The purpose of the rule is to protect the hitter and the hittee.
Im a big MMA fan and am for the rule change, as I understand it.
Savage. <_<
Also, the NFL is now mandating knee and thigh pads but not mouthpieces that protect against concussions. But changes rules to make the game 'safer'. That's where I see a big disconnect.I'm referring to NFL rule changes. The focus on concussions started after the lawsuits.
Well, that and knowing much more about them than they did in the past too.But of course it did...you all whine that these rules will destroy the game...but want to know the quicker way to destroy it?Have someone die on the field...or have more of these lawsuits and have the NFL have to pay out now and in the future.Want ticket prices skying even higher?
Or they could mandate the use of the safest equipment. That, to me, would be the best route to go. Especially since you can change the rules all you want, but the hits will still happen - and the players will still be using inferior safety equipment. The public doesn't see the equipment upgrades though - they notice the flags and rule changes much easier. So that's where the focus has been.And if they're so inclined, do both. But don't allow the use of lesser equipment (or in the case of concussion-reducing mouth guards, no equipment) and say we're making the game safer because we're blurring the lines of what's a legal hit and what's not.
But only outside the 'tackle box' right? Because a RB getting an 8-yard head of steam straight into a pile won't get hurt?
Why stop at just the equipment?The equipment alone will not make all the difference.
I'd be fine with extending it beyond the tackle box.But only outside the 'tackle box' right? Because a RB getting an 8-yard head of steam straight into a pile won't get hurt?
I didn't stay stop there...I said I think it should happen first. Just because a hit is now going to get flagged (and fined) does it mean it will stop? But if the helmet/mouthpiece are better, even the flagged hit will be safer, no?
to be fairno one is suffering from dementia, or shooting themselves in the head because of shoulder or knee injuries.head injuries are worse, they just are.
I really think these guys speaking out against it understand the rule. I think they are under the impression that they can't lower their head at all.
either way the issue is players now don't think to the future, but when they get to the uture they'll be completely able to persue legal action for the league not making the game safer despite the players objectionsNow I am not a league wonk, I think the league ignoring this concussion issue for years and providing misinformation about it is wrong, and they should lose law suits over this. They turned their heads on the risks. But now that they are addressing them, WHATEVER their motivation, we as fans and the players should not be so pessimisticI really think these guys speaking out against it understand the rule. I think they are under the impression that they can't lower their head at all.
I sincerely doubt it
How does not being able to lead with the crown of your helmet make your knees and legs get hurt...please enlighten us?
I thought Campbell suffered from a genetic spinal disease.
There was talk of that...but also more talking his head...and just the years of pounding and taking hits...several articles about that and I think I linked to one somewhere in this topic.As well as his agreement with the NFL making things safer
this rule impacts tight ends, WR, and defenders as well
Yes...they know the risks...just as the ones that are suing the league did as well.This over the top drama bs is hilarious from some of you though.
You should write Junior Seau's family and tell them this.
Well look how long its taken officials in game and the people that dole out the fines to get helmet to helmet or hits on a defenseless reciever correct...hell they aren't even at that point yet of getting things correct. Now factor in this? Its going to be a freaking messI really think these guys speaking out against it understand the rule. I think they are under the impression that they can't lower their head at all.
As in the rule will be misapplied sometimes? You mean like holding or pass interference is about fourteen times a game?
Difference here is officials are told to throw a flag to err on the side of safety with the H2H and DEFLESS WR hits. You don't think the same thing will happen with this now?
Soccer in the US?
No I don't because I clearly interpret differently from you what the NFL is trying to do with this. I like Jeff Fisher's explanation:
So I assume you are against removing the tuck rule?there's almost no chance they apply judgement to that call and get it right as often as we want, and that call is not 15 yards it is a turn over.Well look how long its taken officials in game and the people that dole out the fines to get helmet to helmet or hits on a defenseless reciever correct...hell they aren't even at that point yet of getting things correct. Now factor in this? Its going to be a freaking messI really think these guys speaking out against it understand the rule. I think they are under the impression that they can't lower their head at all.
Except for making it safer? Almost zero.The key phrase here is "leading" with the helmet.
How often does a player lead with his crown in the open field?
Because it's pretty black and white to some of us what this is intended to do, which is to prevent a running back from ramming head on with the top of his head into a defender. That's it.
