Poll: New Helmet Rule

What is your opinion of the new helmet rule?

  • It's about time the NFL did something about all the concussions

    Votes: 1 3.4%

  • The this rule is the epitome of over-officiating - not the game I love.

    Votes: 6 20.7%

  • The new rules strike a good balance bn safety and excitement.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Vague rule makes it impossible for a player (much less a ref) to know what's legal and what's not

    Votes: 22 75.9%
  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .

Share this page

oldbagfan

oldbagfan

No touchy
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
6,878
Reaction score
1,103
Points
113
Location
Calfinoria
I just finished watching a replay of the NE/Philly game and have to say the new helmet rule is NOT a great plan. I'm interested in hearing from my fellow Pats fans. Is this a good idea or has the NFL gone too far and spoiled the game?
And BTW, these are not the only possible responses, friends. Feel free to add you own commentary . . .
:coffee:
 
This is going to be a mess.


I am over 12 (close to 1 a week) on how many games will be decided by questionable calls of this rule this season.
 
oldbagfan said:
I just finished watching a replay of the NE/Philly game and have to say the new helmet rule is NOT a great plan. I'm interested in hearing from my fellow Pats fans. Is this a good idea or has the NFL gone too far and spoiled the game?
And BTW, these are not the only possible responses, friends. Feel free to add you own commentary . . .
:coffee:
Click to expand...

It's the last one. I'm fine with rules designed to limit concussions, but the rule is written terribly, and there's way too much subjectivity. Much like the new catch rule. It was fine the way it was.
 
TommyD420 said:
It's the last one. I'm fine with rules designed to limit concussions, but the rule is written terribly, and there's way too much subjectivity. Much like the new catch rule. It was fine the way it was.
Click to expand...

I'm confident it's going to be a constant source of frustration throughout the season.
 
Jaric said:
I'm confident it's going to be a constant source of frustration throughout the season.
Click to expand...

Pretty likely that at least one team will be throwing a tantrum by the end of every game: depending upon who the ridiculous and absurd rule goes against.

This is gonna be the Tuck Rule league-wide since all teams stand an even chance of being fked every week. I don't know what collection of geniuses drafted this atrocity, but it's a fair bet they never played football.

:insane:
 
oldbagfan said:
Pretty likely that at least one team will be throwing a tantrum by the end of every game: depending upon who the ridiculous and absurd rule goes against.

This is gonna be the Tuck Rule league-wide since all teams stand an even chance of being fked every week. I don't know what collection of geniuses drafted this atrocity, but it's a fair bet they never played football.

:insane:
Click to expand...

You spelled 'Baltimore Ravens' wrong. :coffee:
 
Going to be frustrating, but you have to do something.

I might be more sensitive to this bc of Junior Seau (his team didn't matter, I just loved watching him play). Good dude fell off a cliff and became abusive to his wife and then offed himself. Pretty clear CTE had a lot to do with that. Watching a good dude go to shit hits home pretty hard.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
 
The rule is a step in the right direction but some fine tuning will have to be done to get the execution of the rule right. These ticky-tack calls we're seeing in preseason can't possibly be allowed to spill over in to the regular season - a slight graze of helmets that does no harm can't be allowed to swing a game. There's also the issue of a runner who ducks his head in prep for an impact at the same time the tackler does - who caused the helmet to helmet, the runner or the tackler? Who gets called for the infraction? Another thing, all helmet-to-helmet hits aren't the same so why 15 yards for every one?


I voted "vague rule" but would change "impossible to know what's legal" to "difficult to know what's legal".
 
I voted #4.

Whatever happened to the old "sprearing" rule? Wasn't that sufficient to cover the case?

Although the NFL hates to allow officials to use judgement, that's clearly what's needed here. The official has to look at the play and judge intent. We've all seen tackles where it's clear that the player never intended to use proper form and was simply a missal going in crown first. It's almost impossible for a player not to lower the head when tackling, so the ref has to judge the intent. There's going to be a fair amount of ugliness early on and I wouldn't be surprised to see the refs loosen it up as the season progresses.
 
With the officials ear to New York does ANYBODY trust the free and impartial judgement of the officials this season?

It’s a gem of a timely equalizer.
 
bideau said:
It's almost impossible for a player not to lower the head when tackling
Click to expand...
Not really. Back in the early 60's in New Bedford, we were taught to tackle with head up. It was the only way we were allowed. See who you're tackling and wrap up. There was no problem with tackling head up. The helmet fit into the shoulder pads fine.

THere was a penalty back then called spearing, essentially the same as the helmet rule. It was called on players who attacked head-first head down, without anyone complaining, but then, that was pre-internet.
 
foobahl said:
It is the playoffs I worry about. Just like the catch rule.
Click to expand...

I liked to old catch rule. I know the media liked to play it up how it was a hard rule to get right. It seemed pretty objective to me.

I expect I am in the minority on this. We will see how the changes differ this year.

Dwight Schrute said:
With the officials ear to New York does ANYBODY trust the free and impartial judgement of the officials this season?

It’s a gem of a timely equalizer.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. More and more is put in the hands of New York reviews.

Opens the door for lots of corruption.
 
spacecrime said:
Not really. Back in the early 60's in New Bedford, we were taught to tackle with head up. It was the only way we were allowed. See who you're tackling and wrap up. There was no problem with tackling head up. The helmet fit into the shoulder pads fine.

THere was a penalty back then called spearing, essentially the same as the helmet rule. It was called on players who attacked head-first head down, without anyone complaining, but then, that was pre-internet.
Click to expand...

They still teach that way now.

Tackle with your face up, shoulder, and wrap.
 
bideau said:
Whatever happened to the old "spearing" rule? Wasn't that sufficient to cover the case?
Click to expand...

That occurred to me too. It's pretty obvious when the player is using his helmet as a weapon. Judging "incidental" or "inadvertent" contact is ridiculous. This isn't law where you have to gauge "intent." It's football where what the player is thinking is beyond what the refs can possibly know.

Common sense and what you can actually see with your own eyes has got to be the deciding factor. Otherwise, all calls based on the new rule are going to be totally arbitrary depending upon the mindset of the ref him/herself.

There are so many rules now about every single little thing, it's becoming harder and harder for the players to actually PLAY without fear of penalties.

:patriotlogo::patriotlogo:
 
Well I for one am looking forward to the flags that will be thrown on every goal line running play this season. :coffee:

Think about it.

All the linemen, both offensive and defensive, are going to try and get lower than their opponent.

That's how one wins leverage on such a play.

It's impossible to do that without violating the present rule, as it is written.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top