NFL's stance on concussions and players response to aim at the legs

[OffensivelyPC]

So this debate has been going on and off for a while, but more and more players are responding to the NFL's stance against H2H contact by aiming at the players legs to avoid penalties or fines.  Hits by DJ Swearinger on Dustin Keller capture the tension between avoiding fines and shifting the problem from one debilitating injury to another. 

 

The way the rule reads now, there's no rules for aiming low, and the H2H hits, while on paper may have clear guidelines, in application, it has resulted in incongruent enforcement, not to mention fines are inconsistent.  Many tackles aimed at the chest get H2H penalties simply because of how the WR/RB shift their body in a split second.  So I can see Swearinger's point of view that it's easier to avoid going at the chest.  But at the same token, is it really necessary to aim at the knees?

 

Any ideas on the middleground? Rule modifications?

[BrentMc11]

I do not want to get into rule modifications since we have a new rule on lowering the helmet by running backs.

 

My wish is from the NFL all the way down to pee wee football that we have a renewed emphasis on 'tackling.'  I love watching old film of guys like Jack Lambert (Yes he could be as dirty as they come) hitting and wrapping up.  Thus we can say....that was a great "tackle" and not a great hit.

 

In this old linebacker's mind, the NFL has caused the helmet to become a weapon, and should have realized it long ago.  I think the powers that be should brainstorm it (I guess Jerry Jones is not invited   ) and say if a defensive player has his head down and is hitting with only his helmet(even below waist?)...penalty????  Stay with the fines and suspensions on Helmet to Helmet???

 

Bottom line is....get back to real tackling instead of the helmet as a weapon.......these guys are just too big and fast....someone WILL get killed.  I want to see football with us forever, but changes DO need to be made.  By the way....Go  :nfl:  :nfl:  :nfl: and go             !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[chad72]

Below the neck and above the knees, isn't that what they do for QBs? Why not do the same for pass catchers anywhere?

 

One would rather have a thigh bruise or hip bruise than his head taken off or knees blown off.

[House]

Take away their helmets, and see how willing to throw their bodies around like missiles most of these players will be.

[ColtsBlueFL]

One could see this coming awhile back. An astute reporter asked some time back about the possibility of significantly reducing concussions but suffering the fallout of a large increase in career ending injuries. I cannot quote the NFL spokesperson verbatim, nor find any references at this time, but I remember inferring that the NFL was sided much more toward preventing lifestyle altering injuries (that from brain damage) than career ending (blown out knees). I'm sure they don't want either, but unless they make some alterations that players can implement, that seems to be the way we're headed.

 

Not the article I'm looking for, but...

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-01/preventing-head-injuries-nfl-s-top-priority-commissioner-says.html

[BOTT]

The problem with Swearinger is he went low while Keller's head/back was towards him and that doesn't allow for Keller to adjust. There was absolutely no reason to go low in that situation. As noted above, he could have easily lead with his head up, put the shoulder into him and drivin thru him.

I don't think you can restrict guys from going low in all circumstances. If a running back is coming around that corner a DB many times doesn't have much of a choice but to go low....but that is a totally different situation than above.

[BOTT]

I do not want to get into rule modifications since we have a new rule on lowering the helmet by running backs.

 

My wish is from the NFL all the way down to pee wee football that we have a renewed emphasis on 'tackling.'  I love watching old film of guys like Jack Lambert (Yes he could be as dirty as they come) hitting and wrapping up.  Thus we can say....that was a great "tackle" and not a great hit.

 

In this old linebacker's mind, the NFL has caused the helmet to become a weapon, and should have realized it long ago.  I think the powers that be should brainstorm it (I guess Jerry Jones is not invited   ) and say if a defensive player has his head down and is hitting with only his helmet(even below waist?)...penalty????  Stay with the fines and suspensions on Helmet to Helmet???

 

Bottom line is....get back to real tackling instead of the helmet as a weapon.......these guys are just too big and fast....someone WILL get killed.  I want to see football with us forever, but changes DO need to be made.  By the way....Go  :nfl:  :nfl:  :nfl: and go             !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agree. I don't like to quote Merrill Hodge, but he said these rules aren't a change, but a correction. Tackling became so bad because player don't even try to tackle...they just hit.

[OffensivelyPC]

Below the neck and above the knees, isn't that what they do for QBs? Why not do the same for pass catchers anywhere?

 

One would rather have a thigh bruise or hip bruise than his head taken off or knees blown off.

I think that's a rather difficult thing to do.  Unlike the QB who stands upright to throw, the pass catcher follows the ball.  Sometimes their outstretched in mid-air, other times diving, bending over, or leaning forward making the area between the chest and the thighs almost non-existent.  It's plays like this that often get H2H penalties, but its' impossible for the defender to abide by it.  And I suppose that you can make any tackling rule impossible to abide by on a case by case example.

[OffensivelyPC]

I do not want to get into rule modifications since we have a new rule on lowering the helmet by running backs.

 

My wish is from the NFL all the way down to pee wee football that we have a renewed emphasis on 'tackling.'  I love watching old film of guys like Jack Lambert (Yes he could be as dirty as they come) hitting and wrapping up.  Thus we can say....that was a great "tackle" and not a great hit.

 

In this old linebacker's mind, the NFL has caused the helmet to become a weapon, and should have realized it long ago.  I think the powers that be should brainstorm it (I guess Jerry Jones is not invited   ) and say if a defensive player has his head down and is hitting with only his helmet(even below waist?)...penalty????  Stay with the fines and suspensions on Helmet to Helmet???

 

Bottom line is....get back to real tackling instead of the helmet as a weapon.......these guys are just too big and fast....someone WILL get killed.  I want to see football with us forever, but changes DO need to be made.  By the way....Go  :nfl:  :nfl:  :nfl: and go             !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm hoping that the RB helmet rule will help with this.  I don't like the idea of RBs not being able to lower their head, but outside of the invisible 3 yard box inbetween the tackles.  But at the same time, RBs won't be using their heads as weapons quite so much, so they'll be more upright when in open field, allowing tacklers to have a bigger target area to aim for.

[OffensivelyPC]

The problem with Swearinger is he went low while Keller's head/back was towards him and that doesn't allow for Keller to adjust. There was absolutely no reason to go low in that situation. As noted above, he could have easily lead with his head up, put the shoulder into him and drivin thru him.

I don't think you can restrict guys from going low in all circumstances. If a running back is coming around that corner a DB many times doesn't have much of a choice but to go low....but that is a totally different situation than above.

Which is why I think the penalties and fines are ridiculous in some situations.  They err on the side of caution and throw the flag, which usually gets a fine.  If it were (or could at least) be better enforced, players wouldn't be erring on the side of caution by going low.  In theory, I agree with you that Swearinger had no business tackling as low as he did.  At the same token, I get where he's coming from, even if his comments in defense are difficult to take seriously.

[amfootball]

This is a no win situation. The hit is legal so offensive players are going to have to jump more I guess. It is amazing how many current and former players said they would rather have the concussion then the knee injury given all the data on the long term effects of concussions ....

[OffensivelyPC]

This is a no win situation. The hit is legal so offensive players are going to have to jump more I guess. It is amazing how many current and former players said they would rather have the concussion then the knee injury given all the data on the long term effects of concussions ....

I kind of always laughed at that myself.  It's completely at odds with the concussion lawsuit. 

[Hans Moleman]

Maybe...just maybe, the lost art of the proper tackle will have to make a proper comeback.

 

I love how Swearinger makes the case that it's either the knee, the head, or nothing. I suppose if you don't know how to tackle (the week before, Zach Line ragdolled him on his long screen pass TD because Swearinger failed to wrap him up), going for knees and headshots is all you have left. Going for Keller's knee was a direct result in having no faith in his ability to simply wrap and drive because of the Line missed tackle the week before.

[supremecoltsfan300]

This is a no win situation. The hit is legal so offensive players are going to have to jump more I guess. It is amazing how many current and former players said they would rather have the concussion then the knee injury given all the data on the long term effects of concussions ....

 

Completely agree. Players need to realize that knee injuries will probably take away their playing careers at most. Head injuries will eventually take away their playing careers, but more importantly, they will take away their post-career time. Being screwed up in the head is one of the worst things I can imagine.

[GoPats]

Maybe...just maybe, the lost art of the proper tackle will have to make a proper comeback.

 

 

This. The concept of "wrapping up" to make a tackle seems completely lost now. 

 

As fans we're all partially to blame... who doesn't like to see a good hit? I remember being very young and playing my first year of Pop Warner. "Watch the hips to tell which way a guy's going to go, and then wrap him up and drag him down." It wasn't, "Either decapitate him or take his legs out." 

 

I hope the NFL does find middle ground, or we'll all be watching flag football in 10 years.

 

And as for head vs. knee injuries... no question, no comparison. Look no further than Junior Seau for that answer. I realize that's hard to convey to a 20-something guy who has a lot of football left ahead of him, but we're talking about living versus dying here. 

[mvbighead]

The problem with Swearinger is he went low while Keller's head/back was towards him and that doesn't allow for Keller to adjust. There was absolutely no reason to go low in that situation. As noted above, he could have easily lead with his head up, put the shoulder into him and drivin thru him.

I don't think you can restrict guys from going low in all circumstances. If a running back is coming around that corner a DB many times doesn't have much of a choice but to go low....but that is a totally different situation than above.

 

Problem is, some guys are at a physical disadvantage when taking down a larger opponent.  If your option is to wrap him up and possibly have him wither away, or to strike low and take away his balance, you're most likely going to strike low.

 

To me, the best way to take this out is to punish sideways hits to the knee, but then I have no idea how the heck you'd enforce something like that, as there would be a lot of subjectiveness to it.  But for the most part, knees get shredded when a guys feet are planted and someone hits them sideways in the knee.  The Brady/Pollard hit would be a bit different, but most ball carriers aren't standing upright when they get struck.

 

I have no idea.  It almost needs to come down to:

 

If you strike a person and cause injury, you will have to sit out, without pay, for as long as that person is unable to play.  That is to say, if you hit someone in the knee, while not making a proper form tackle, and an injury is the result, you get to miss as much time as that person does, and half of your salary will go to that person while you are sitting out.  This would have to be completely subject to league review, and panel of NFL players or something, but that is about the only way I could see something changing with regard to knee shots.

 

I repeat, I have no idea, but I can't think of a single rule that would benefit this problem without sacrificing the integrity of the game.  And while some players would be injured during routine tackles, I would say that a guy like Swearinger would most likely be punished in the rule scenario I suggested.  I just doubt it would ever happen, due to the players' union and what not.

[OffensivelyPC]

Yeah I don't really get why players make it about either the head or the knees.  Sure, there are times where you don't really have much of an area to wrap up, but that's the exception rather than the rule.  If they could get back to basic fundamentals, this wouldn't be so much of an issue.  But hey, these guys are in their mid twenties early 30's, so obviously the experience of older guys like Junior Seau or retirees doesn't translate to the NFL today.  What do they know? lol

 

@GoPats - had to chuckle to myself when you said "Watch the hips to tell..." that's always what I was taught as well and brought back little league memories.   

[BOTT]

Problem is, some guys are at a physical disadvantage when taking down a larger opponent.  If your option is to wrap him up and possibly have him wither away, or to strike low and take away his balance, you're most likely going to strike low.

 

To me, the best way to take this out is to punish sideways hits to the knee, but then I have no idea how the heck you'd enforce something like that, as there would be a lot of subjectiveness to it.  But for the most part, knees get shredded when a guys feet are planted and someone hits them sideways in the knee.  The Brady/Pollard hit would be a bit different, but most ball carriers aren't standing upright when they get struck.

 

I have no idea.  It almost needs to come down to:

 

If you strike a person and cause injury, you will have to sit out, without pay, for as long as that person is unable to play.  That is to say, if you hit someone in the knee, while not making a proper form tackle, and an injury is the result, you get to miss as much time as that person does, and half of your salary will go to that person while you are sitting out.  This would have to be completely subject to league review, and panel of NFL players or something, but that is about the only way I could see something changing with regard to knee shots.

 

I repeat, I have no idea, but I can't think of a single rule that would benefit this problem without sacrificing the integrity of the game.  And while some players would be injured during routine tackles, I would say that a guy like Swearinger would most likely be punished in the rule scenario I suggested.  I just doubt it would ever happen, due to the players' union and what not.

I don't think Swearinger was really concerned about being able to take down Keller considering the position Keller was in. I could have made that tackle....well, maybe not, but you get the point.

[House]

This. The concept of "wrapping up" to make a tackle seems completely lost now.

As fans we're all partially to blame... who doesn't like to see a good hit? I remember being very young and playing my first year of Pop Warner. "Watch the hips to tell which way a guy's going to go, and then wrap him up and drag him down." It wasn't, "Either decapitate him or take his legs out."

I hope the NFL does find middle ground, or we'll all be watching flag football in 10 years.

And as for head vs. knee injuries... no question, no comparison. Look no further than Junior Seau for that answer. I realize that's hard to convey to a 20-something guy who has a lot of football left ahead of him, but we're talking about living versus dying here.

In my opinion the art of tackling was lost for two reasons.

1) The impact of "big spear hits" is what makes the highlight reels. It became a contest to blow guys up and make Sport Centers top ten. Obviously I'm just making generalizations, but on the field, at least to me it seems, guys care more about getting a big hit than actually making solid football plays.

I remember a few years ago when Collie was still an active member of the team. He caught a pass and immediately got blown up by a defender. The defender then proceeds to act very proud of himself and showboat. Only thing is Collie caught the pass for around 10yrd and a first down. Now I'm not saying I know for a fact the defender could have played it differently, only that, he was more concerned that he made a big hit, than that he was upset he allowed a completion. Really wish I could remember the specific game though lol.

2) is the helmet becoming a weapon. The helmet was there to protect against head to head collisions. Not facilitate them. The more technology progressed with the helmets, and the faster the game got, the more dangerous the hits.

[Nostrils]

Maybe...just maybe, the lost art of the proper tackle will have to make a proper comeback.

 

I love how Swearinger makes the case that it's either the knee, the head, or nothing. I suppose if you don't know how to tackle (the week before, Zach Line ragdolled him on his long screen pass TD because Swearinger failed to wrap him up), going for knees and headshots is all you have left. Going for Keller's knee was a direct result in having no faith in his ability to simply wrap and drive because of the Line missed tackle the week before.

 

 

oh really, that's why? 

[Hans Moleman]

I don't think Swearinger was really concerned about being able to take down Keller considering the position Keller was in. I could have made that tackle....well, maybe not, but you get the point.

 

Agreed. Keller was in no position to get enough drive on that particular play to break free. While Keller does have a size edge on DJ, Swearinger's momentum was more than enough to make the play by wrapping up.

[Hans Moleman]

oh really, that's why? 

 

 

He hasn't said as much, but putting myself in the shoes of a rookie who's fighting for a starting gig, it's only natural not to want to be on someone else's highlight for two weeks in a row.

[Nostrils]

I don't think Swearinger was really concerned about being able to take down Keller considering the position Keller was in. I could have made that tackle....well, maybe not, but you get the point.

riiiiight

[BOTT]

In my opinion the art of tackling was lost for two reasons.

1) The impact of "big spear hits" is what makes the highlight reels. It became a contest to blow guys up and make Sport Centers top ten. Obviously I'm just making generalizations, but on the field, at least to me it seems, guys care more about getting a big hit than actually making solid football plays.

I remember a few years ago when Collie was still an active member of the team. He caught a pass and immediately got blown up by a defender. The defender then proceeds to act very proud of himself and showboat. Only thing is Collie caught the pass for around 10yrd and a first down. Now I'm not saying I know for a fact the defender could have played it differently, only that, he was more concerned that he made a big hit, than that he was upset he allowed a completion. Really wish I could remember the specific game though lol.

2) is the helmet becoming a weapon. The helmet was there to protect against head to head collisions. Not facilitate them. The more technology progressed with the helmets, and the faster the game got, the more dangerous the hits.

I think coaches emphasized using the helmet too. How to you get the offensive player to drop or turn the ball over? Just blast them in the head

[BOTT]

riiiiight

I'm glad you agree

[oldunclemark]

So this debate has been going on and off for a while, but more and more players are responding to the NFL's stance against H2H contact by aiming at the players legs to avoid penalties or fines.  Hits by DJ Swearinger on Dustin Keller capture the tension between avoiding fines and shifting the problem from one debilitating injury to another. 

 

The way the rule reads now, there's no rules for aiming low, and the H2H hits, while on paper may have clear guidelines, in application, it has resulted in incongruent enforcement, not to mention fines are inconsistent.  Many tackles aimed at the chest get H2H penalties simply because of how the WR/RB shift their body in a split second.  So I can see Swearinger's point of view that it's easier to avoid going at the chest.  But at the same token, is it really necessary to aim at the knees?

 

Any ideas on the middleground? Rule modifications?

No OPC..it isnt.

 

Swearinger lied.......He could have hit Keller anywhere. Keller didn't see him coming

 

Swearinger chose to hit Keller in the knee instead of hitting him in the chest...to jar the ball loose

 

You cant jar the ball loose hitting somebody in the knee.

 

It was just a bad play by the deep back...its no sign of a trend

[Narcosys]

I do not want to get into rule modifications since we have a new rule on lowering the helmet by running backs.

 

My wish is from the NFL all the way down to pee wee football that we have a renewed emphasis on 'tackling.'  I love watching old film of guys like Jack Lambert (Yes he could be as dirty as they come) hitting and wrapping up.  Thus we can say....that was a great "tackle" and not a great hit.

 

In this old linebacker's mind, the NFL has caused the helmet to become a weapon, and should have realized it long ago.  I think the powers that be should brainstorm it (I guess Jerry Jones is not invited   ) and say if a defensive player has his head down and is hitting with only his helmet(even below waist?)...penalty????  Stay with the fines and suspensions on Helmet to Helmet???

 

Bottom line is....get back to real tackling instead of the helmet as a weapon.......these guys are just too big and fast....someone WILL get killed.  I want to see football with us forever, but changes DO need to be made.  By the way....Go  :nfl:  :nfl:  :nfl: and go             !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Narcosys]

Maybe...just maybe, the lost art of the proper tackle will have to make a proper comeback.

 

I love how Swearinger makes the case that it's either the knee, the head, or nothing. I suppose if you don't know how to tackle (the week before, Zach Line ragdolled him on his long screen pass TD because Swearinger failed to wrap him up), going for knees and headshots is all you have left. Going for Keller's knee was a direct result in having no faith in his ability to simply wrap and drive because of the Line missed tackle the week before.

Im sorry but anything and everything you say i cannot take seriously.  You have a pic of Justin Bieber with his shirt off...I hope your female, otherwise...

[BOTT]

Im sorry but anything and everything you say i cannot take seriously.  You have a pic of Justin Bieber with his shirt off...I hope your female, otherwise...

He lost a bet

[Yehoodi]

So this debate has been going on and off for a while, but more and more players are responding to the NFL's stance against H2H contact by aiming at the players legs to avoid penalties or fines.  Hits by DJ Swearinger on Dustin Keller capture the tension between avoiding fines and shifting the problem from one debilitating injury to another. 

 

The way the rule reads now, there's no rules for aiming low, and the H2H hits, while on paper may have clear guidelines, in application, it has resulted in incongruent enforcement, not to mention fines are inconsistent.  Many tackles aimed at the chest get H2H penalties simply because of how the WR/RB shift their body in a split second.  So I can see Swearinger's point of view that it's easier to avoid going at the chest.  But at the same token, is it really necessary to aim at the knees?

 

Any ideas on the middleground? Rule modifications?

 

I agree with what most have already posted . . . for me I will always look at the sport of rugby for comparison . . . I think it is easier to enforce rules from similar sports . . . true rugby is not as wide open as it is, for the most part, two long lines facing each other, but there is some open field tackling . . .

 

for me, like in rugby, one needs to wrapped up the tackle and go down with his man, i.e. you can't just lunge at the guy . . . also you can not at all, hit above the shoulders . . .so for me the NFL should just put the target above the knee and below the head, not too different than rugby . . . surely as there is more open field in football and perhaps less chance to wrap up and//or tackle a larger opponent, but that is just life, what is the worst thing that can happen, you do not tackle the guy and he runs and is tackled by the next player . . . a lot better alternative than concussion and knee ligament tears imo . . .

[Kenny]

I agree with what most have already posted . . . for me I will always look at the sport of rugby for comparison . . . I think it is easier to enforce rules from similar sports . . . true rugby is not as wide open as it is, for the most part, two long lines facing each other, but there is some open field tackling . . .

 

for me, like in rugby, one needs to wrapped up the tackle and go down with his man, i.e. you can't just lunge at the guy . . . also you can not at all, hit above the shoulders . . .so for me the NFL should just put the target above the knee and below the head, not too different than rugby . . . surely as there is more open field in football and perhaps less chance to wrap up and//or tackle a larger opponent, but that is just life, what is the worst thing that can happen, you do not tackle the guy and he runs and is tackled by the next player . . . a lot better alternative than concussion and knee ligament tears imo . . .

 

 

This. Should make a 15 yrd penalty for intentional tackling outside the tackle box(Box as in above knees below kneck/head) , and if it was intentional and caused injury automatic ejection. Sure it would be hard to tell if it is intentional but players would think twice before hunting for a weak spot. Seems a lil harsh sure but it would emphasize the art of proper tackling and would in time prolong careers. Granted I could just be a crackpot too .

[SteelCityColt]

Problem is, some guys are at a physical disadvantage when taking down a larger opponent.  If your option is to wrap him up and possibly have him wither away, or to strike low and take away his balance, you're most likely going to strike low.

 

Somewhat agree and disagree with this one, being a man a not great stature I was used to having a size disadvantage when playing Rugby but no matter how big you are if someone hits you with the correct technique around the waist and wraps your legs up your not going anywhere no matter how big you are. Importantly too if the correct technique is used it's safe for both players. The issue with low hits as shown in this case is when the hit starts at knee height and the helmet is used to lead, any contact with a standing leg and your in trouble. Oddly enough in Rugby this is being phased out as the taught technique because players have become adept at passing the ball to a teammate when their legs start to get wrapped so your now taught to hit high and try and wrap the arms. This has IMO lead to more instances of head collisions between players. 

 

Back to the NFL I'm amazed at how poorly some of the Defensive players tackle, it;s not even a case of being physically outmatched they just have really poor technique it seems, going high trying to hit with the shoulder (or helmet) only and not engaging the arms. Seriously I would fancy myself a better tackler than some of them! 

[ruksak]

I read this as "Some NFL players will always hit dirty, no matter what the rule is."

[BrentMc11]

I'm hoping that the RB helmet rule will help with this.  I don't like the idea of RBs not being able to lower their head, but outside of the invisible 3 yard box inbetween the tackles.  But at the same time, RBs won't be using their heads as weapons quite so much, so they'll be more upright when in open field, allowing tacklers to have a bigger target area to aim for.

Not thrilled with the RB rule either.  I am a FIRM believer that the tackler keeps head up to reduce injury to all players.  This include neck injuries/paralisis to the tackler/'hitter' just as well.  

[BrentMc11]

I agree with what most have already posted . . . for me I will always look at the sport of rugby for comparison . . . I think it is easier to enforce rules from similar sports . . . true rugby is not as wide open as it is, for the most part, two long lines facing each other, but there is some open field tackling . . .

 

for me, like in rugby, one needs to wrapped up the tackle and go down with his man, i.e. you can't just lunge at the guy . . . also you can not at all, hit above the shoulders . . .so for me the NFL should just put the target above the knee and below the head, not too different than rugby . . . surely as there is more open field in football and perhaps less chance to wrap up and//or tackle a larger opponent, but that is just life, what is the worst thing that can happen, you do not tackle the guy and he runs and is tackled by the next player . . . a lot better alternative than concussion and knee ligament tears imo . . .

Very well thought out post Yehoodie....very interesting!!  

[BrentMc11]

HMMMM....I like it, but do not know how to take it  I wish I was a computer whiz at his age...we did not have them.....OOPS...the old man comes out...  

[OffensivelyPC]

No OPC..it isnt.

 

Swearinger lied.......He could have hit Keller anywhere. Keller didn't see him coming

 

Swearinger chose to hit Keller in the knee instead of hitting him in the chest...to jar the ball loose

 

You cant jar the ball loose hitting somebody in the knee.

 

It was just a bad play by the deep back...its no sign of a trend

The trend isn't players getting hit in the knees, the trend is players blaming the rules on H2H contact for hitting the knees.  Players have always been hit in the knees.  But the accusation that they hit players in the knees to avoid penalties and fines is fairly recent.

[Narcosys]

HMMMM....I like it, but do not know how to take it  I wish I was a computer whiz at his age...we did not have them.....OOPS...the old man comes out...  

 

ha, youre reading to much into it   , I was merely saying it was a pretty good post and i was agreeing with it, giving you a thumbs up.

[Mameluc]

The Swearinger hit had nothing to do with the whole dont hit the head, thats nonsense and he knows it. he is just trying to save face.

Keller is with his back, he had the whole body to hit, not just the head, but he decided to go low.

 

im not saying he tried to injure Keller, but it was a hard hit and a dirty hit IMO. Again, i dont think he meant to, but that doesnt make it any less of a dirty hit.

[Mameluc]

I agree with what most have already posted . . . for me I will always look at the sport of rugby for comparison . . . I think it is easier to enforce rules from similar sports . . . true rugby is not as wide open as it is, for the most part, two long lines facing each other, but there is some open field tackling . . .

 

for me, like in rugby, one needs to wrapped up the tackle and go down with his man, i.e. you can't just lunge at the guy . . . also you can not at all, hit above the shoulders . . .so for me the NFL should just put the target above the knee and below the head, not too different than rugby . . . surely as there is more open field in football and perhaps less chance to wrap up and//or tackle a larger opponent, but that is just life, what is the worst thing that can happen, you do not tackle the guy and he runs and is tackled by the next player . . . a lot better alternative than concussion and knee ligament tears imo . . .

I understand what you mean but say you have steven jackson going all speed and the only thing in front of him is a CB. no way he doesnt go low...he just neesd to not go directly to the knee.