How to prevent injuries but keep the NFL physical?

[Sports Central1]

What do all of you think and suggest on how to prevent injuries in the NFL but not to take away from the physicality of it?

 

There are currently around 93 players in the NFL on IR with some sort of ACL or other knee injury.

 

I say the NFL needs to take a close look at Rugby where there are no helmets or shoulder pads and there's also less injuries there.  They tackle properly in that sport by "wrapping up."

 

DB's no longer tackle in the NFL, they just want to hit with their helmet, shoulder and launch themselves at the knees.  It doesn't help when you got jerks like Bernard Pollard and Brandon (Big Bang Clock) Meriweather out there.

 

Boston Globe's Bob Ryan: "DB's don't tackle anymore."

 

http://www.csnne.com/blog/patriots-talk/ryan-dbs-do-not-tackle-anymore

 

For all the work the NFL has done to make the game safer, an AP (Associated Press) review of penalties shows there's still nearly one illegal blow to the head or neck in every game. (AP)

 

http://csnne.stats.com/fb/story.asp?i=20131210114544847219408&ref=hea&tm=&src=

ayer must "attempt" to wrap when tackling below the hips" (in rugby, you must attempt to wrap in the tackle at all times, I see where, with shoulder pads, it would not be practical, because pads are too bulky & tackler would always be bouncing off. But, below the hips shold be the new rule....The NFL is in unchartered territory wh

.I suggest google Rugby Tackle".....that's your solution...wrapping up".....(only difference would be, in the NFL, "player must "attempt" to wrap when tackling below the hips" (in rugby, you must attempt to wrap in the tackle at all times, I see where, with shoulder pads, it would not be practical, because pads are too bulky & tackler would always be bouncing off. But, below the hips shold be the new rule....The NFL is in unchartered territory when making safety rules....they must be thought out. From the late 1990's until last year, Rugby has implemented a number of "experimental rule changes"...they would try between 5-9 changes for a one year period & then decide by using statistics & logic as to which Laws (Rules) they would keep. A little frustrating at times, but ultimately, they got it right for the safety part & as far as modernizing the game. TIP to NFL: Take the cue from your Daddy Sport, stop making silly excuses like...."ask players which they would rather be hit, High? or Low?....that's the thought process of a child (at best)...moronic is more accurate.

I suggest google Rugby Tackle".....that's your solution...wrapping up".....(only difference would be, in the NFL, "player must "attempt" to wrap when tackling below the hips" (in rugby, you must attempt to wrap in the tackle at all times, I see where, with shoulder pads, it would not be practical, because pads are too bulky & tackler would always be bouncing off. But, below the hips shold be the new rule....The NFL is in unchartered territory when making safety rules....they must be thought out. From the late 1990's until last year, Rugby has implemented a number of "experimental rule changes"...they would try between 5-9 changes for a one year period & then decide by using statistics & logic as to which Laws (Rules) they would keep. A little frustrating at times, but ultimately, they got it right for the safety part & as far as modernizing the game. TIP to NFL: Take the cue from your Daddy Sport, stop making silly excuses like...."ask players which they would rather be hit, High? or Low?....that's the thought process of a child (at best)...moronic is more accurate.

I suggest google Rugby Tackle".....that's your solution...wrapping up".....(only difference would be, in the NFL, "player must "attempt" to wrap when tackling below the hips" (in rugby, you must attempt to wrap in the tackle at all times, I see where, with shoulder pads, it would not be practical, because pads are too bulky & tackler would always be bouncing off. But, below the hips shold be the new rule....The NFL is in unchartered territory when making safety rules....they must be thought out. From the late 1990's until last year, Rugby has implemented a number of "experimental rule changes"...they would try between 5-9 changes for a one year period & then decide by using statistics & logic as to which Laws (Rules) they would keep. A little frustrating at times, but ultimately, they got it right for the safety part & as far as modernizing the game. TIP to NFL: Take the cue from your Daddy Sport, stop making silly excuses like...."ask players which they would rather be hit, High? or Low?....that's the thought process of a child (at best)...moronic is more accurate.

[Moose Of Woe]

The best way to protect everyone, along with the integrity of the game, is to quit oversaturating the game with rules trying to protect everyone. It hampers what defenders, and now running backs, can do.

 

When you've got 180-400 pound bodies flying, twisting, and pulling every which way someone is going to get hurt. That's the NFL. It will not stop no matter how many rules they put in place.

[BOTT]

They need to start teaching fundamental tackling again. I was watching Ohio St play last year and Chris Spielman was appalled at the awful tackling. I rolled my eyes when I heard TJ Ward claim he was scared to go high on Gronkowski. I realize the new rules some times put these guys in a bind, but he couldn't deliver a shot to the body of a guy that is 6'5 and running off balance? Then again, that is easy for me to say from my recliner.

[dgambill]

I suggested limiting strike zone. I agree it may someday have to go to a leather helmet again and no pads. It would be hard to go to rugby style because of the verticality of the game. In rugby you don't have a guy necessarily blazing down the field catching a ball. In reality it will take a limiting the strike zone and in my honest opinion having size limitations on the players. Say ball carriers can't be over 200lbs. Or lineman limited to 300 and players more than 5 yds off the ball have to be under 240 or something. Big players mean bigger collisions....and also smaller players have limited means to take down these bigger receivers (TEs and RBs). Think pop warner type rules we had as children. Other ways is to actually test for HGH and have more severe penalties for PEDs. Who knows really...I know these all sound crazy but there will eventually have to be something done. I also believe they need to allow the teams to practice more. The limitations with the CBA have caused I think more early season/pre-season injuries where players weren't ready to perform.

[TAPLOOK]

The best way to protect everyone, along with the integrity of the game, is to quit oversaturating the game with rules trying to protect everyone. It hampers what defenders, and now running backs, can do.

 

When you've got 180-400 pound bodies flying, twisting, and pulling every which way someone is going to get hurt. That's the NFL. It will not stop no matter how many rules they put in place.

True. There is no magic fix. Players have and will always get hurt. You have to adjust rules or players would be dying on the field with todays size, speed and conditioning. Some changes are good and some not so good.

[Sports Central1]

If you want to reduce the number of injuries you don't need more rules and regulations.  Hit players in the wallet.  You need to increase the fine and length of the suspension.  If a player takes out another player's knees and he suffers a season ending injury then the player who caused the injury has to be suspended the same length of time the injured player is not playing.

 

A $100,000 dollar fine and lengthy suspension for any player that targets the knees and blows out a players knees or hip.

[21isSuperman]

I'm interested in how many of these would be non-contact knee ligament tears.  Ones like Reggie Wayne's are just bad luck (pun intended?).  He threw an inaccurate pass and Reg had to adjust himself awkwardly to get it, resulting in an injury.  In Gronk's case, it was a contact injury.  If a majority of them are contact injuries, then I think we can say it's because of the rules where players can't hit high. 

 

So the debate arises once again (as it did when the rule began): is it better to hit a guy in the knees (and potentially end his career) or hit him in the head (and potentially compromise his life)?  Take out the hitting high rule and you'll see more concussions.  Keep the hitting high rule in and you'll see more knee injuries.  With knee injuries, you run the risk of having it end your career.  With head and neck injuries, you run the risk of compromised brain health and quality of life. If I recall correctly, most players said they would rather take a shot to the head than the legs.  But a recent $765 million settlement could force the league to continue business as usual

[Synthetic]

I don't think it's possible anymore. The game is already so watered down defenses can barely do anything.

 

 

I already have a migraine don't really want to think about this right now unless I have a bottle of Hennessy.

[BOTT]

I don't think it's possible anymore. The game is already so watered down defenses can barely do anything.

 

 

I already have a migraine don't really want to think about this right now unless I have a bottle of Hennessy.

They could do other things to help the defense like actually call holding, stop calling ticky tac pass interference, take the headset out of the QB's helmet, and maybe extend the 5 yard contact rule for DB's.

[Synthetic]

They could do other things to help the defense like actually call holding, stop calling ticky tac pass interference, take the headset out of the QB's helmet, and maybe extend the 5 yard contact rule for DB's.

 

 

They do call holding on the defense, just not in every single game.

 

The NFL has already watered the league down, I agree with you on stopping the calls for pass interference but there's no way they are going to do it now. A team like the 1984 Niners or the 1991 Redskins that had physical defenses would easily be averaging 10-15 penalties a game for how rough they played in today's era.

 

 

Plus mega touchdown numbers sell tickets....NFL has no problem whatsoever making the league easier for this.

[Sports Central1]

They do call holding on the defense, just not in every single game.

 

The NFL has already watered the league down, I agree with you on stopping the calls for pass interference but there's no way they are going to do it now. A team like the 1984 Niners or the 1991 Redskins that had physical defenses would easily be averaging 10-15 penalties a game for how rough they played in today's era.

 

 

Plus mega touchdown numbers sell tickets....NFL has no problem whatsoever making the league easier for this.

 

The '84 Niners and '91 Redskins were nothing compared to the Raiders and Steelers of the 1970's in terms of physicality and nastiness.

[chad72]

RBs, WRs and TEs have to be tackled above the knee and below the neck unless they are level with the player in which case they can tackle between the knees and ankle.The knee to ankle area is the one that can cripple a player's career with injuries.

 

If you are trailing, chances are, you won't go for the knee and you will tackle their legs. If you are playing in front of the ball carrier, you have enough of a strike zone from above the knee to below the neck, IMO.

[BOTT]

The '84 Niners and '91 Redskins were nothing compared to the Raiders and Steelers of the 1970's in terms of physicality and nastiness.

Far more head hunting in the 90's and 2000's than the 80's/70's. Jack Tatum was considered dirty player in the 70's at 5'10 200lbs....John Lynch played the same way at 6'2 220 and nobody thought anything of it.

[Sports Central1]

Far more head hunting in the 90's and 2000's than the 80's/70's. Jack Tatum was considered dirty player in the 70's at 5'10 200lbs....John Lynch played the same way at 6'2 220 and nobody thought anything of it.

 

John Lynch was NOT doing what Jack Tatum and George Atkinson were doing.   There were some similarities but the rules started to change in the 1980's.  The 1970's were a lawless league in the NFL.

[BOTT]

John Lynch was NOT doing what Jack Tatum and George Atkinson were doing. There were some similarities but the rules started to change in the 1980's. The 1970's were a lawless league in the NFL.

Hell he wasn't. Lynch was a straight up head hunter. Most people just buy into the myths of nfl films of how tough and rugged these old timers were. Fact is, the players have gotten bigger and faster and the game has gotten more violent thru the years. You even pointed out in your OP that many players don't tackle....they hit. If I had to get wrapped up by Jack Lambert or have James Harrison launch helmet first at me, I will take Lambert every time.

[buccolts]

No face masks?

Reduce pads?

Suspension for as long as the guy you injured it out?

 

Anyone know how the CFL is doing in this area?

Could widening the field help?

[-JJ-]

I was watching a couple old football movies today, the ones with leather helmets.  They all armed tackled. There was no launching the body back then.

 

Barring that- flag football

[Sports Central1]

Hell he wasn't. Lynch was a straight up head hunter. Most people just buy into the myths of nfl films of how tough and rugged these old timers were. Fact is, the players have gotten bigger and faster and the game has gotten more violent thru the years. You even pointed out in your OP that many players don't tackle....they hit. If I had to get wrapped up by Jack Lambert or have James Harrison launch helmet first at me, I will take Lambert every time.

 

John Lynch was NOT doing this in his career and he wouldn't be allowed to or he'd be kicked out of the league.  NO player today is allowed to do anything of the sort of what was allowed in the 1970's.  There's more violence in the video below than in the last 5 years in the NFL.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZBCOqUotAs

[BOTT]

John Lynch was NOT doing this in his career and he wouldn't be allowed to or he'd be kicked out of the league. NO player today is allowed to do anything of the sort of what was allowed in the 1970's. There's more violence in the video below than in the last 5 years in the NFL.

The rules about hitting defenseless players were not in effect when Lynch was playing. Just YouTube John Lynch biggest hits.....they are mostly helmet first head shots. The only thing different is Lynch is bigger than Tatum, and Tatum was cheap shotting people out of bounds.

Well duh, no one is playing like that today, they changed the rules.....that was kinds of my point. But it is still very violent, ask Steven Ridley, who got knocked out by pollard last year in the playoffs.

[House]

How about more practices, instead of less? Genius idea I know.