- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Lowering Helmet Rule Passes Wow
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:44 am to SaintNation
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:44 am to SaintNation
Basically they are saying that no one can weaponize their helmet, whether on offense or defense.
2
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:45 am to Jumbeauxlaya
Seriously I jump my kids arse every time he drops his head while running the football. I really dont think it will cause more running backs to get hurt, drop your pads and keep your head up just like a tackler does. Not as much of a ridiculous rule as it seems upfront. If a tackler hits you full speed with his shoulder on the crown of your helmet as a runner who do you think it is dangerous for.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:46 am to HMTVBrian2
Exactly.
But it seems that you and I are being the only rational ones here.
But it seems that you and I are being the only rational ones here.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:46 am to Sophandros
quote:
Basically they are saying that no one can weaponize their helmet, whether on offense or defense.
Exactly, while actually adding a small level of protection for the person dropping their head.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:47 am to HMTVBrian2
quote:
You can protect yourself at the line of scrimmage and protect yourself from hits but you can't use your helmet as a weapon anymore.
exactly. Only the blatant fouls will be called.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:47 am to HollierThanThou
I can understand the change they are trying to make, and honestly i saw a few times last year where we got nailed with penalties despite our player doing right, but the offensive player leading into the tackle head first.
with that said, i don;t agree with the change - shite happens. no need to change the rule - the more you regulate things, the more people are going to get hurt.
with that said, i don;t agree with the change - shite happens. no need to change the rule - the more you regulate things, the more people are going to get hurt.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:48 am to Sophandros
I think people are overreacting to the actual effect this will have on the game.
How many times would this have been called last season?
I speculate not that many.
This is just a due diligence move by the NFL
How many times would this have been called last season?
I speculate not that many.
This is just a due diligence move by the NFL
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:51 am to HollierThanThou
they kinda started this shite by flagging defenders who put dont put their heads up. Those guys were at a disadvantage to RBs who didnt have to do that.
If RBs change their game to accommodate this new rule (i doubt many will), you could see two things: less falling forward for the extra few yards, and more fumbles.
If RBs change their game to accommodate this new rule (i doubt many will), you could see two things: less falling forward for the extra few yards, and more fumbles.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:56 am to Chad504boy
I wanna cover the tight end
Posted on 3/20/13 at 11:57 am to Hugo Stiglitz
I don't think it will be large in terms of impact. It won't be called much. But if that's the case why add yet another judgement call on the not even fulltime job referees?
Goodell and his political correctness while still carrying on with outright bullshite reminds me too much of the federal government. I'm moving out of the USA in a few months. Ever increasing regulation and government intrusion is a big factor in that. I imagine the NFL rule book is expanding at a much sharper curve than the feds.
Since I went OT I gotta throw out two of my favorites- Regulating what soft drink sizes ya can have. Second, we gotta have a sign before every bridge to tell us it freezes before the road does. MFer, I guess the yearly decline of US educational levels compared to the rest of the world is right.
Goodell and his political correctness while still carrying on with outright bullshite reminds me too much of the federal government. I'm moving out of the USA in a few months. Ever increasing regulation and government intrusion is a big factor in that. I imagine the NFL rule book is expanding at a much sharper curve than the feds.
Since I went OT I gotta throw out two of my favorites- Regulating what soft drink sizes ya can have. Second, we gotta have a sign before every bridge to tell us it freezes before the road does. MFer, I guess the yearly decline of US educational levels compared to the rest of the world is right.
This post was edited on 3/20/13 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:01 pm to SaintNation
fricking pathetic. 
this rule
this rule
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:06 pm to pellietigersaint
Wow, so no the league will be full of players like Reggie and Sproles. AP is screwed!
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:10 pm to blueslover
quote:
I'm moving out of the USA in a few months.
i get it. just as players have a choice to play in the NFL, you too have a chouce to live here or elsewhere. good luck to ya. You should renounce your citizenship while youre at it.
quote:
Ever increasing regulation and government intrusion is a big factor in that
that bad ole federal government. How dare they attempt to protect consumers and the general public.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:27 pm to Thracken13
quote:
with that said, i don;t agree with the change - shite happens. no need to change the rule - the more you regulate things, the more people are going to get hurt.
yeah, I can respect that. Its just I don't think we are going to see as many flags as most people may think.
think about it. The game itself would be an hour longer or later in order to stop it and make all of those calls and that just won't happen. There would be an uproar from everyone much like there was with the replacement refs last year and we know the league doesn't want that either.
This post was edited on 3/20/13 at 12:29 pm
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:30 pm to blueslover
quote:
I'm moving out of the USA in a few months.
Blues, what country/region you going to (just curious)? A buddy of mine moved to Ecuador and he is pretty happy there.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:32 pm to bountyhunter
Ecuador, seriously. Would appreciate contact info.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:33 pm to LooseCannon22282
I only agree with this change because it levels the playing field for defenders. If they can't do it offensive players shouldn't be able to.
That said, I didn't care for either change.
That said, I didn't care for either change.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:39 pm to bonethug0108
quote:
That said, I didn't care for either change.
neither do I, but I understand why they are doing it.
just put me in the small crowd on this board who thinks there won't be as many flags from this new rule as much as the majority would.
This post was edited on 3/20/13 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:45 pm to Hugo Stiglitz
quote:
I think people are overreacting to the actual effect this will have on the game.
How many times would this have been called last season?
Pretty much every time Ivory touched the ball.
Posted on 3/20/13 at 12:46 pm to LooseCannon22282
After actually reading the rule, its only for running outside of the tackle box. Therefore i now agree that it won't be a big deal. They can still hit the LOS hard.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News