re: What should the Jags defender have done on the Gronk hit

quote:

---

Without reading the rest of the topic, wrap up instead of trying to bring the boom?

---

So you are cool with just conceeding a 30 yard gain.

Just conceede it. If his fingertips touch the ball - game over. Just conceede the gain.

That's football to you? Somebody makes an apparent catch and it's game over? Hands off...Oh, child let the poor guy complete the catch...he's gone through so much running down the field. Lets gift him the yards...because we don't care about winning. Make a nice catch child and I won't touch, don't want to interfere with your glory photo for your parents.

Wrap up? Da Fuq?

Who gives a shite if you make the fricking tackle...

You just gave the opposition a 30 yard completion.

The point of football has always been to negate that attempt at a 30 yard completion - not just say, hey guys I stopped him short of the goal line.

To dislodge the ball. THat's the fricking point of DBs either to knock it away or dislodge it by contact.

You don't give up a big gain and say...oh well, I wrapped him up. Ronnie Lott would be playing sandlot if he thought that way...so would every other great safety, linebackers or DBs, including ones who play today.

Your job since high school is to dislodge the ball - make it a NON-CATCH vs. a 30 yard gaid-but I tackled him coach.

So allowing completions is assuring that you will give up less points if you give up more yards?

Damn some of y'all are really retarded. Did y'all ever actually play football? That's not even a proper hit. Hit should be at the waste and wrap up.

And to the people about giving up plays, what happens if he completely misses? It's even more yards. The chance of knocking the ball loose is low anyway if the receiver already caught the ball.

quote:

---

So allowing completions is assuring that you will give up less points if you give up more yards?

---

You did some special olympics to get that out of what I said

In before some idiots says wrap up. He's not trying to tackle Gronk he's trying to not let him catch the ball.

quote:

---

Damn some of y'all are really retarded. Did y'all ever actually play football? That's not even a proper hit. Hit should be at the waste and wrap up.

---

So, retard, what happens when he goes for his waist, and Gronk ducks lower, their helmets collide, and he still gets flagged?

quote:

---

So, retard, what happens when he goes for his waist, and Gronk ducks lower, their helmets collide, and he still gets flagged?

---

there have been hits that are almost at waist level that have ended up being called "helmet to helmet" (mostly in college)

i've made a couple threads about this. when it's the offensive player's helmet that causes the contact, they should get a foul. that would apply to this hit. you can't just make a rule that is written for player safety but only enforce it on the field one way.

if H2H is bad, then whichever player's helmet causes the contact should get the penalty. that would be gronk in this case

it's even more terrible in college b/c of the ejection. a couple years ago in a Pac12 (stanford was involved...maybe against Oregon) there was a TERRIBLE ejection. a CB had a legit fricking form tackle on one of those plays where the dB is in off coverage and the QB snaps and immediately throws to the WR. facemask in the WRs chest. arms wrapping around him. due to the bang-bang nature of the play the WRs helmet snaps back then forward, causing contact. the DB was fricking ejected

frick
that

quote:

---

This has nothing to do with the Patriots you taint lickers

I fully beleive this penalty would have been thrown for any team against any team

---

yeah my criticisms are free of any team bias

the problem is thsi

the defender is not in the matrix. they have to create the target of their hit, while moving, on a moving object

the issue plays occur in 2 ways (and 2 often occurs in 1)

1. the defender targets a 100% legal area with a 100% legal hit but the OFFENSIVE PLAYER reacts to bring his helmet into the target zone

2. the defender targets legally, hits legally, and there is no helmet-helmet contact until the head of the offensive player reacts to the hit and collides with the helmet of the defender

it is irrational, illogical, and unfair to defenders to penalize them for either behavior. the offensive player should be penalized for situation #1

This tackle makes me think there should be “offensive targeting” penalties.

If they wanna pansy up the league, go all out.