Players can no longer lower helmet.

[Four2itus]

On 3/28/2018 at 9:02 AM, TdungyW/12 said:

There’s already a flag thrown almost every play.

Out of 47,220 plays in the NFL last season, a flag was thrown 4167 times. That is less than 9%. This statement is a massive exaggeration. 

On 3/28/2018 at 9:33 AM, TdungyW/12 said:

 .... people are going to tune out. 

Yes. And the NFL will keep right on churning. I stopped watching the NBA 20 years ago, because the league started allowing travelling in the name of high profile dunking and poor dribbling techniques coming out of college. Now you see 4 steps on occasion. Fans like me who chose to not watch have not stopped the NBA. 

On 3/29/2018 at 9:14 AM, jshipp23 said:

They are ruining football...It's a dangerous game, and these guys know what they are signing up for..They are paid accordingly as well..No one is forcing anyone to play the game...These penalties are going to completely change games and alter the outcomes..

As most all sports change with the rules over time. Feel free to read about the anger some felt when they raised the height of the mound in MLB. Many left the sport....or when they eliminated clotheslining in the NFL. Many left then too. It will keep right on churning. 

On 3/29/2018 at 9:20 AM, jshipp23 said:

There is NO WAY to make football safe...Might as well play flag football now...

This is a classic over exaggeration in the opposite direction. They are not trying to make the game safe. They are trying to save the game. Comparing flag football to the NFL is silly. People are dying and living shortened and diminished lives because of head trauma. If you want your argument to sway peoples opinions, try making a reasonable comparison. 

On 3/29/2018 at 9:33 AM, jshipp23 said:

Football is popular for a reason, the danger and violence is what what makes it so intriguing.....A

For you, perhaps. I have been watching it for 40 years, and it is for the planning, strategy, execution, and displays of incredible athletic ability. I have no doubt to your sincerity about why you watch the game. But step out of yourself to realize you are not necessarily a representative of all. 

 

 

These posts were meant to show a different opinion, not to single out these particular posters. 

[crazycolt1]

4 hours ago, Four2itus said:

Out of 47,220 plays in the NFL last season, a flag was thrown 4167 times. That is less than 9%. This statement is a massive exaggeration. 

Just out of curiosity I would like to know what percentage out of that 9% of penalties are called on kick offs and punts? There seems to be more flags thrown during those plays than any other plays in the game.

I could be wrong but it seems there is a flag called on at least 70%?  That would bring your comment of 9% down quite a bit. Plus add the off side penalties and it would lower even more.

[Four2itus]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Just out of curiosity I would like to know what percentage out of that 9% of penalties are called on kick offs and punts? There seems to be more flags thrown during those plays than any other plays in the game.

I could be wrong but it seems there is a flag called on at least 70%?  That would bring your comment of 9% down quite a bit. Plus add the off side penalties and it would lower even more.

Now I understand what you're inferring. Took me a sec....

[dgambill]

On ‎3‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 8:41 AM, chad72 said:

 

Yes it is. They retained lowering the helmet in certain cases, now even that would be gone. I do wonder how they will deal with incidental helmet-to-helmet like the cases you mentioned, RB trying to protect himself, lowers shoulder naturally lowering head, and a helmet-to-helmet happens. 

 

What is next, eliminating the stiff arm to avoid neck injuries? I am not sure. Football is a violent sport by nature and athletes with a lot of power and speed will force unavoidable situations, can't catch them all.

 

My point about the RB position is when RBs are blind sided, or any runner as a matter of fact and the helmet-to-helmet being allowed in those cases. Alvin Kamara got his concussion because of a helmet-to-helmet outside the tackles from Deion Jones of the Falcons in that TNF game. 

OL/DL get penalties for hands to the face. Defense get face masking penalties....why should a runner be able to shove his hand and snap back the defenders head? I think it was an obvious rule to change. I can't believe it hasn't been fixed by now. A runner could still stiff arm a guys chest or shoulder pads but I don't understand why he should be able to do it to the guys head. I know we can't legislate everything out of the game but I'd much rather see that be removed then the impending legislation this rule will put on the game. This one is going to be very hard call on the field....obvious calls outside the tackles etc maybe...but in the trenches on those runs up the middle....very difficult.

[dgambill]

On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 4:33 PM, crazycolt1 said:

Just out of curiosity I would like to know what percentage out of that 9% of penalties are called on kick offs and punts? There seems to be more flags thrown during those plays than any other plays in the game.

I could be wrong but it seems there is a flag called on at least 70%?  That would bring your comment of 9% down quite a bit. Plus add the off side penalties and it would lower even more.

Punt returns have to be the most penalized plays in football. I can't remember what game it was but it was a prime time game like Sunday or Monday night and literally they had to re-punt 4 times because of all the penalties. If I'm on offense I just want them to fair catch it. So many holding or blocks in the back. Same thing with the offense...they are always holding etc. Maybe I'm exaggerating but I agree those plays seem to get called far and away the most. I'm sure they are going to eventually do away with the kickoff once they figure out what to do with an onside kick...punts will probably take longer...but changes will continue to happen.

[crazycolt1]

25 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Punt returns have to be the most penalized plays in football. I can't remember what game it was but it was a prime time game like Sunday or Monday night and literally they had to re-punt 4 times because of all the penalties. If I'm on offense I just want them to fair catch it. So many holding or blocks in the back. Same thing with the offense...they are always holding etc. Maybe I'm exaggerating but I agree those plays seem to get called far and away the most. I'm sure they are going to eventually do away with the kickoff once they figure out what to do with an onside kick...punts will probably take longer...but changes will continue to happen.

I agree. I think they are going to spot the ball on the 25 yd line and be done with kick offs. Very few of those are run back anyway with the big footed kickers we have now.

I am not sure about punts?  It could come down to where the receiving team catches the punt and the ball is dead at that spot.

[dgambill]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I agree. I think they are going to spot the ball on the 25 yd line and be done with kick offs. Very few of those are run back anyway with the big footed kickers we have now.

I am not sure about punts?  It could come down to where the receiving team catches the punt and the ball is dead at that spot.

Not sure as most kickers can easily punt it 80 yds they just don’t because it would out kick their coverage. Pat actually had an issue with that early in his career until he realized that it was counter productive. I haven’t seen the injury issues the same on punts because people get blocked immediately and they don’t get full speed like they do on kick offs but yes I agree kickoffs will cease...just what do you do about onside kicks?

[crazycolt1]

37 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Not sure as most kickers can easily punt it 80 yds they just don’t because it would out kick their coverage. Pat actually had an issue with that early in his career until he realized that it was counter productive. I haven’t seen the injury issues the same on punts because people get blocked immediately and they don’t get full speed like they do on kick offs but yes I agree kickoffs will cease...just what do you do about onside kicks?

Good question. I don't know.

 Off topic--That question reminded of something most don't know. A punt can be off side kicked after a safety. As far as I know it has only been done one time I can remember. 

[Reality Check]

15 hours ago, dgambill said:

Not sure as most kickers can easily punt it 80 yds they just don’t because it would out kick their coverage. Pat actually had an issue with that early in his career until he realized that it was counter productive. I haven’t seen the injury issues the same on punts because people get blocked immediately and they don’t get full speed like they do on kick offs but yes I agree kickoffs will cease...just what do you do about onside kicks?

Elimination of kickoffs is a BIG DEAL IMO....primarily because of how important an onside kick is when a team is trying to make a comeback.  If the ability to mount a comeback is significantly dampened due to no (onside) kickoff, the NFL will lose a lot of viewers late in games.

 

Outside of players' health, I fail to see where this might be good for the game...

[k9copinmd]

Should make quarterback sneaks and short yardage/goal line situations a lot more ummmm.... interesting

[dgambill]

6 hours ago, Reality Check said:

Elimination of kickoffs is a BIG DEAL IMO....primarily because of how important an onside kick is when a team is trying to make a comeback.  If the ability to mount a comeback is significantly dampened due to no (onside) kickoff, the NFL will lose a lot of viewers late in games.

 

Outside of players' health, I fail to see where this might be good for the game...

There was some things floated around that a team could try for say a 4th and 15 to retain the ball or something along those lines. Would open up a whole other line of issues like what would penalty on defense mean etc. I like it now. Just change so that fair catch on onside kick inside 25 brings ball out to 25 so they stop kicking those high angled kicks to the 2 and force returns.

[Reality Check]

12 hours ago, dgambill said:

There was some things floated around that a team could try for say a 4th and 15 to retain the ball or something along those lines. Would open up a whole other line of issues like what would penalty on defense mean etc. I like it now. Just change so that fair catch on onside kick inside 25 brings ball out to 25 so they stop kicking those high angled kicks to the 2 and force returns.

With NO disrespect to your post, I just read stuff like this and it becomes so obvious that "the game of football" (as I have known it for 40yrs) is being transformed before our eyes.

 

I am not so sure I am liking it???.....

[dgambill]

5 hours ago, Reality Check said:

With NO disrespect to your post, I just read stuff like this and it becomes so obvious that "the game of football" (as I have known it for 40yrs) is being transformed before our eyes.

 

I am not so sure I am liking it???.....

Agreed. I am not making it up it has been floated around by the competition committee. So there is some support for it. I am against getting rid of kickoffs altogether. I fully recognize that the game I have known for a good 35 years is harmful to those playing it and that with the greater knowledge we have now need to make adjustments to ensure it lasts the next 35 years. They tried to adjust the kickoffs so that incentivized getting the ball on the 25 to not return it out of the endzone. So teams started kicking higher and shorter so they could pin teams deeper and forcing them to return it. Thus I think the next logical step would be that any fair catch signal inside the 25 would place the ball on the 25 to again incentivize teams to not return it and limit this most dangerous play in the game. Teams would still however have the option of returning, onside kicking, sqwib kicking etc so that the play and the players would still survive...but hopefully on a more limited basis. I hate the idea of a 15yd play to retain the ball...it just opens up a whole can of worms and imo would benefit really good teams as they might be able to control the ball and never give it to the opposing team if their offense is good enough. Things have already changed a great deal...I expect some more changes...but eliminating the play and those players to me is not the answer.

[oldunclemark]

On ‎3‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 7:09 AM, Cynjin said:

The new rule that lowering the helmet to initiate contact is going to be a huge change if strictly enforced.   Especially when running between the tackles.

It wont be strictly enforced but everybody has to understand that hitting with the helmet (no matter who was taught to do that) has to be phased out...

 

....It does not matter what the players or fans think......The players will adjust. They will kick and scream about it but they will adjust

There is no choice..

[oldunclemark]

On ‎4‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 5:57 PM, k9copinmd said:

Should make quarterback sneaks and short yardage/goal line situations a lot more ummmm.... interesting

No, this will probably apply only to the open field..again..'using the helmet as a weapon'

[Cynjin]

11 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

It wont be strictly enforced but everybody has to understand that hitting with the helmet (no matter who was taught to do that) has to be phased out...

 

....It does not matter what the players or fans think......The players will adjust. They will kick and scream about it but they will adjust

There is no choice..

 

10 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

No, this will probably apply only to the open field..again..'using the helmet as a weapon'

 

The way the rule is currently written it doesn't matter where on the field the player is.  It also doesn't say anything about hitting with the helmet.   Potentially,  if a Rb lowers his head picking up a blitz he is committing a foul.  Olinemen who lower their heads in a short yardage situation or performing a cut blocks are committing fouls, etc.

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

No, this will probably apply only to the open field..again..'using the helmet as a weapon'

 

Rich McKay has emphasized this will be the criteria-

 

If you lower your head with the intention of 'initiating contact' with your helmet, and you actually DO initiate contact with your helmet, you will get flagged.  Now this said, I feel 'incidental contact' will not be flagged quite as much.

 

The NFL will go around to every team this year with video showing the rules and what will be called (catch/no catch and targeting (lowering the head), plus other rules changes.  And it is on them to train their Officials too. 

 

I feel pre-season will be a flag fest.  As players learn to adjust, the officials will be more lenient in less flagrant cases. Just a gut feeling I have.

[dgambill]

I don't see how the NFL survives another 50 years. Honestly....they will either have to go to some flag football or something similar to rugby with no pads and helmets in some variation or they will literally have to turn it into some kind of demolition ball....with the players wearing spikes on their shoulder pads and weapons on the field and played by inmates and those incarcerated. I mean we have states that limit how large your soda can be....do you not think in 50 years most of the contact etc will be legislated out of the game? It is what it is...I'm not too concerned because while I love pro football I find myself every year caring a little less about it and finding better things to do with my time. Perhaps if the Colts return to glory I might feel my passion return but the game has become so much more than about a sport of players trying to do incredible feats of athleticism etc...the whole discussion of politics and racism and medical ethics (all very important I might add just not what I want to spend my Sunday afternoon being bombarded by after a week of "news and media" doing it to me)...I just don't want to listen to it. Heck my wife couldn't even watch a gymnastic competition because it was Nasser this and that....we as a society are ruining almost anything pure about our sports...and that is a very sad thing. The beauty is about gone. Then I go watch a high school sectional game or a girls soccer game and I get that warm feeling. Ok ok...I'm done...rant over lol. Nobody need reply lol.

[dgambill]

Oops...double post! Sorry!

[dgambill]

ARGGGHHH!! LOL

[Reality Check]

2 hours ago, dgambill said:

I don't see how the NFL survives another 50 years. Honestly....they will either have to go to some flag football or something similar to rugby with no pads and helmets in some variation or they will literally have to turn it into some kind of demolition ball....with the players wearing spikes on their shoulder pads and weapons on the field and played by inmates and those incarcerated. I mean we have states that limit how large your soda can be....do you not think in 50 years most of the contact etc will be legislated out of the game? It is what it is...I'm not too concerned because while I love pro football I find myself every year caring a little less about it and finding better things to do with my time. Perhaps if the Colts return to glory I might feel my passion return but the game has become so much more than about a sport of players trying to do incredible feats of athleticism etc...the whole discussion of politics and racism and medical ethics (all very important I might add just not what I want to spend my Sunday afternoon being bombarded by after a week of "news and media" doing it to me)...I just don't want to listen to it. Heck my wife couldn't even watch a gymnastic competition because it was Nasser this and that....we as a society are ruining almost anything pure about our sports...and that is a very sad thing. The beauty is about gone. Then I go watch a high school sectional game or a girls soccer game and I get that warm feeling. Ok ok...I'm done...rant over lol. Nobody need reply lol.

I couldn't agree more with this post!

 

I am thinking that "football" will go the way of e-sports.  We will watch a "virtual reality" game of football where there is actually no "pain" being absorbed by any of the participants.   Who knows??....

[Reality Check]

This w/e, I heard that the new developmental league will NOT BE HAVING KICKOFFS....and that he NFL will be watching closely.

 

Get ready folks, we will be watching an NFL with no kickoffs in a couple yrs....and punts will not be far behind....

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, Reality Check said:

This w/e, I heard that the new developmental league will NOT BE HAVING KICKOFFS....and that he NFL will be watching closely.

 

Get ready folks, we will be watching an NFL with no kickoffs in a couple yrs....and punts will not be far behind....

 

The NFL will do something about kickoffs, because it causes the most severe injuries in the game than any other play. Bill Polian is the architect of of the rules for the new Alliance of American football, which has eliminated the kickoff.

The reason they went without kickoffs is twofold.  One, to get rid the 4.2-4.3 speed guys getting up a 40 to 50 yard head of steam, then crashing into blockers trying to knife through and get to the ball carrier, who is also building up some speed.  Two, fan engagement on the play is often very low.  Yes there are a few big surprises here and there, but usually it is a low excitement play except for  people getting blown up (and often severly injured, others or themselves IE: Rutgers Eric LeGrand

 

There's data to back this up too.  Here is but one-

 

https://www.spoc-ortho.com/patient-resources/health-articles/football-kickoffs-have-highest-risk-severe-injuries

 

I feel the NFL should adopt a punt from the 35 as the new kick off, or the option to give it to the other team at their own 30 yard line.  No kick at all. In the punt style kickoff option, the two lines are right up against each other and thus it keeps players from building up unimpeded force of speed.  Thus lower severe injuries are seen on punts, yet there are sometimes that rare occurrence of an exciting  and exceptional breakaway play or a muff, just like the kickoff at times presents. All with less danger of catastrophic injury as well. Of course, you could also run a trick play from the 'punt off' and complete a run/pass over ten yards and keep the ball.  Similar to a onside kick. If you fail to get the ten yards or more, other team gets the ball there.

 

Something will be done about the kickoff.  Instead of people complaining about it, they should think of an alternative that is less dangerous, yet folks would watch and gives a team down two scores late to still have a chance to tie or win.  I'm still internally debating all scenarios and details, then will write the commissioner my thoughts about when I'm satisfied about an alternative that makes it safer, yet still strategic with potential excitement.

 

EDIT: I think after the kickoff is addressed, next up on the list will be elimination of the 3 point stance. O and D lines will have to stand up {crouch} and heads up.

[King Colt]

Piece by piece football is being removed from the game of football.

[crazycolt1]

44 minutes ago, King Colt said:

Piece by piece football is being removed from the game of football.

Maybe, but player by player are becoming brain damaged too.

So just for your satisfaction of seeing violence you think the NFL shouldn't be implementing these rules?

[Reality Check]

30 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Maybe, but player by player are becoming brain damaged too.

So just for your satisfaction of seeing violence you think the NFL shouldn't be implementing these rules?

Speaking for myself, part of the reason I was drawn to the game is/was b/c of the violent nature of the game back in the 70's.  I have also argued IN FAVOR of escalating player salaries due to the fact that they were/are taking years off their life by providing "entertainment" for the masses.

 

It is only a statement of fact that he game does not really resemble the game which I fell in love with 40+yrs ago.  It has NOTHING to do with my desire to see people's lives ruined...

[southwest1]

On March 30, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Four2itus said:

This is a classic over exaggeration in the opposite direction. They are not trying to make the game safe. They are trying to save the game. Comparing flag football to the NFL is silly. People are dying and living shortened and diminished lives because of head trauma. If you want your argument to sway peoples opinions, try making a reasonable comparison. 

No, the owners aren't. They just don't wanna get sued again & pay off a class action lawsuit again. 

 

If owners really cared about player safety, they would show signs of starting to guarantee player contracts. 

 

"If you want your argument to sway peoples opinions, try making a reasonable comparison. "

 

Generally speaking, it's never a good persuasion tactic to infer that someone is stupid F2. I don't see the same flaw in JS23's POV that you do apparently. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me actually. 

[southwest1]

I just wish the NFL rules committee would enact something that would actually give defensive players some slack once. Why does it seem like 90% of the rules benefit the darn offense?

 

LBs, DE's, Safeties, & CB's have a right to earn a paycheck too with having both hands tied behind their backs with an endless supply of yellow flags right? I'm starting to wonder. 

[shakedownstreet]

On 28/03/2018 at 8:09 AM, Cynjin said:

Players can no longer lower helmet.

 

Unless the player is wearing a Patriot's jersey

[Four2itus]

3 hours ago, southwest1 said:

No, the owners aren't. They just don't wanna get sued again & pay off a class action lawsuit again. 

 

If owners really cared about player safety, they would show signs of starting to guarantee player contracts. 

 

"If you want your argument to sway peoples opinions, try making a reasonable comparison."

 

Generally speaking, it's never a good persuasion tactic to infer that someone is stupid F2. I don't see the same flaw in JS23's POV that you do apparently. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me actually. 

There are several incorrect assumptions in this post to me. Assuming that the owners aren't trying to save the game is saying they don't want to continue to make money. Of course they dont want to get sued again. I think they are greedy. They are trying to save the game for their own selfish reasons. Next, I never said anything about whether or not they care about player safety. Lastly, I chose my words carefully when I wrote the above bolded. I was not inferring that they were stupid because I dont treat people that way. Those are your words. 

 

However, the post that I responded to was saying that they might as well play flag football. It was, and still is, an unreasonable comparison. If that sounds perfectly reasonable to you, well and good. 

[Four2itus]

8 hours ago, Reality Check said:

It is only a statement of fact that he game does not really resemble the game which I fell in love with 40+yrs ago.  It has NOTHING to do with my desire to see people's lives ruined...

It is a different game. However, the reason why it is different, is worth considering. The sport is reaching critical mass in regards to physics. Just as the invention of basketball, and having the basket at 10' is a completely different game than when it started.....football is far different. In the case of football, We are talking about sever impact. More importantly, we are talking about the total amount of times a player experiences severe impact in an average career. We see old footage of great hits like Bednarik taking out Gifford, but what we fail to realize is that was a rare hit. Severe impacts now happen constantly. Why? Because players have used scientific methods in their training to get fast, stronger, and bigger. We can chant all we want about keeping the game as it was, but that would require keeping training as it was. 

 

The leagues biggest fear, is millions pf people watching, and a player dies from a hit. We are right on that edge. 

[southwest1]

2 hours ago, Four2itus said:

There are several incorrect assumptions in this post to me. Assuming that the owners aren't trying to save the game is saying they don't want to continue to make money. Of course they dont want to get sued again. I think they are greedy. They are trying to save the game for their own selfish reasons. Next, I never said anything about whether or not they care about player safety. Lastly, I chose my words carefully when I wrote the above bolded. I was not inferring that they were stupid because I dont treat people that way. Those are your words. 

 

However, the post that I responded to was saying that they might as well play flag football. It was, and still is, an unreasonable comparison. If that sounds perfectly reasonable to you, well and good. 

Saving the game is a misguided point. It's all about TV ratings & making sure that the NFL has a pipeline via the NCCAA to college football players who dream of being drafted into the league itself. 

 

""If you want your argument to sway peoples opinions, try making a reasonable comparison."

 

Yes, I bolded exactly what you said. With all do respect, how else was a reasonable person supposed to interpret them sir? Honestly, it's not a stretch F2U. The vast majority of people would have reached the exact same conclusion I did. If you can't see that, I can't help you. 

 

I can accept that what I thought you said wasn't your original intent, but please don't pretend like my response to your post was unfounded because it's not. 

 

Look, you're a fine poster & no one is diminishing anyone's character here. I just didn't agree with what you said to JS23 that's all. Life goes on. 

[Reality Check]

13 hours ago, Four2itus said:

It is a different game. However, the reason why it is different, is worth considering. The sport is reaching critical mass in regards to physics. Just as the invention of basketball, and having the basket at 10' is a completely different game than when it started.....football is far different. In the case of football, We are talking about sever impact. More importantly, we are talking about the total amount of times a player experiences severe impact in an average career. We see old footage of great hits like Bednarik taking out Gifford, but what we fail to realize is that was a rare hit. Severe impacts now happen constantly. Why? Because players have used scientific methods in their training to get fast, stronger, and bigger. We can chant all we want about keeping the game as it was, but that would require keeping training as it was. 

 

The leagues biggest fear, is millions pf people watching, and a player dies from a hit. We are right on that edge. 

Agreed....

 

Simply put.... "The human body & brain was not designed to withstand the game of tackle football"

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 3/30/2018 at 12:32 PM, Reality Check said:

Just read an article in bleacher report about this new rule. While I am still trying to wrap my head around it (no pun intended), I am thinking that this rule should not be governed in "real time" by the on-field officials.  Instead, film should be reviewed throughout the week & fines/suspensions should be issued accordingly.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2767037-nfls-new-targeting-rule-is-going-to-be-a-total-disaster?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial

 

It's essentially a done deal.  This will be governed in real time, including disqualifications (ejections) by on field officials, and / OR replay officials in New York monitoring games in real time.

 

On 3/30/2018 at 12:32 PM, Reality Check said:

"One hundred percent," offensive lineman Geoff Schwartz, who played eight years in the NFL, told B/R. "They better figure out a way to narrow down the interpretation of a foul here. We thought the catch rule was a disaster and put the refs in a bind. Wait until this starts. The game is played too fast to determine on-the-field ejections."

 

 

I have not seen the rule as present in the 2018 NFL official rulebook, but I did see this tweet from Troy Vincent-

 

 

Troy reviewed over 40,000 plays.  He says there were only 3 that violated the rule and would have immediate disqualification.  They are identified with video embedded in his tweet.  But they were-

 

Atlanta Falcons safety William Moore, landing an unobstructed hit on Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver Jordan Matthews, a play that occurred in 2015.

video located within this page-

https://247sports.com/nfl/philadelphia-eagles/Bolt/Falcons-William-Moore-fined-for-hit-on-Jordan-Matthews-39479267

 

Danny Trevathan’s hit on Davante Adams last season.

 

Cincinnati Bengals safety George Iloka’s hit on Pittsburgh Steelers wide receiver Antonio Brown.

 

Vincent say they are not increasing rosters, nor are they interested in ejecting players left and right. But-

 

Troy Vincent is the current NFL Executive Vice President of Football Operations.  For the youngsters out there, Vincent was also the 7th pick overall in round 1 of the 1992 draft by the Dolphins.  He also played cornerbaqck for the Bills, Eagles, and Redskins.

 

Vincent was President of the NFL Players Association from 2004-2008.  He was Vice President of Active Player Development in February 2010, since renamed NFL Player Engagement Organization.

[Cynjin]

It has now been reported that linemen coming out of their stances must have their heads up.  They cannot keep their heads lower and initiate contact according to the report.  This is going to significantly change the way linemen do their jobs if they enforce it this way.

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/22/nfl-confirms-linemen-coming-out-of-their-stance-are-subject-to-new-helmet-rule/

[21isSuperman]

This rule doesn't make sense to me.  I understand trying to make the game safer for the players, but lowering your head is such an instinctive move that I think it'll be nearly impossible to get players to stop completely, and it'll result in unwarranted penalties that affect the game negatively.

[ColtsBlueFL]

2 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

This rule doesn't make sense to me.  I understand trying to make the game safer for the players, but lowering your head is such an instinctive move that I think it'll be nearly impossible to get players to stop completely, and it'll result in unwarranted penalties that affect the game negatively.

 

Lowering your head in a 'protective' mode will not get an ejection/penalty. Lowering your head in a 'strike first' / make a huge play mode will.

 

For the others, I feel they will over enforce these in preseason... to get players acclimated before the 'real' games take place. 

[21isSuperman]

7 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Lowering your head in a 'protective' mode will not get an ejection/penalty. Lowering your head in a 'strike first' / make a huge play mode will.

 

For the others, I feel they will over enforce these in preseason... to get players acclimated before the 'real' games take place. 

Same action, if you ask me.  Many times when a defender goes to tackle the ball carrier, he lowers his head - and not always to make a huge play, even in routine tackles.  I also think this will be really difficult to enforce and could get really subjective, which could result in unequally applied penalties.  Overall, I think this is a bad idea

[Cynjin]

9 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Lowering your head in a 'protective' mode will not get an ejection/penalty. Lowering your head in a 'strike first' / make a huge play mode will.

 

 

 

By doing that they are dramatically changing the game.  Goal line and short yardage plays are changed, can players cut block anymore?  Running between the tackles is going to be severely curtailed.  

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

5 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

Same action, if you ask me.  Many times when a defender goes to tackle the ball carrier, he lowers his head - and not always to make a huge play, even in routine tackles.  I also think this will be really difficult to enforce and could get really subjective, which could result in unequally applied penalties.  Overall, I think this is a bad idea

 

3 hours ago, Cynjin said:

 

By doing that they are dramatically changing the game.  Goal line and short yardage plays are changed, can players cut block anymore?  Running between the tackles is going to be severely curtailed.  

 

 

I've heard Al Riveron explain it on various shows. Here is one tape of him explaining it... what is OK and what will get an ejection. 

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap3000000933867/Al-Riveron-explains-the-new-lowering-of-helmet-rule