NFL may prevent runners from lowering their heads

[thenewera44]

NFL may prevent runners from lowering their heads into tacklers

Posted by Michael David Smith on March 14, 2013, 3:42 PM EDT

In another sign that the days of punishing, physical running backs like Jim Brown and John Riggins are coming to an end, the NFL is considering a rules change that would penalize runners for lowering their heads and initiating contact with tacklers.


Members of the NFL’s Competition Committee revealed today that they want to see a new rule that would make it a personal foul for either a runner or a tackler to engage in head-first contact with the crown of the helmet when running into each other outside the tackle box.

“This is a pure and simple player safety rule,” NFL Competition Committee Chair Rich McKay said. “We really think the time has come where we need to address the situation in space where a runner or a tackler has a choice of how to approach his opponent.”

McKay said there was no one specific play that made the Committee propose this rule change, and he said that the play that was viewed by many as the most violent example of a helmet-to-helmet hit in the NFL all season — Bernard Pollard’s collision with Stevan Ridley in the AFC Championship Game — would not have been a penalty because neither player was directly leading with the crown of his helmet.

Rams coach Jeff Fisher, a member of the Competition Committee, said he believes coaches will be able to properly instruct their players in how to adjust to this rule.

“The ballcarrier is still going to be permitted to lower his shoulder, and the head is also going to come down to protect the football,” Fisher said. “We’re not taking that part of the run out of the game. What we’re saying is, in space, one-on-one, head-up, we’re not going to allow you to load up and use the crown of your helmet. It’s an obvious thing.”

It’s obvious that each year, the NFL’s Competition Committee is going to try a little bit harder to take us closer to a time when helmet-to-helmet hits are removed from the game completely.

[fallforward3y+]

This is very bad news for the NFL, I agree. The rule by itself doesn't change much, because really ball carriers don't ever lower their heads INTO defenders, that would be stupid. They only lower their head if they can lean and get it past the defender, and when they lower their shoulder they put their head to the side most of the time. BUT, its just another thing for them to think about that can make a player play softer, which will hurt the game. It could get in their head, make them focus more on not getting a penalty than running as hard as they can. It's also a sign that we are progressing further away from real football but slowly so people don't panic.

The real truth is, people need to stop acting like they are heroes trying to prevent concussions, and just let them play. Firstly, if you don't want to play then just don't. Secondly, there are several ways for a player to protect theirself and still be effective, they just don't bother to do them because many of them are sort of "taboo" in football. It's a matter of choice, the choice to play at all and the choice to play stupid

People need to really think about this stuff, and stop assuming that Goodell and his goons know what they are talking about, because they don't. The precautions taken aren't even what causes injury in many cases...a few examples

Quarterbacks not running-QBs are much more likely to get hurt standing there in the pocket with a defender getting a clean head on shot at them and not being able to protect themselves than they are running, getting hit at an angle and dropping their shoulder down, which will help shield their body. RG3 actually got hurt when sliding, in a situation where if he had dropped his shoulder he would likely have been fine..but because he slid his head hit the defender's body

Hitting less in practice-you rarely see somebody get an injury in a 1 on 1 tackling situation when they are running with the ball..it's when they aren't looking that makes that happen..or getting hit by more than 1 that makes it happen. If you want to minimize risk in practice, you can have defenders only hit a ball carrier with full force if he is running with it and just make the tackle if he is not looking..you can easily drive a ball carrier who isn't running back w/o a hard hit...or have them just go for the ball instead of the hit on a pass play(which is what they should do anyway)..no reason to take away anything practicing 1 on 1 tackling situations, you have to practice that to stay good at it.

The 18 game schedule proposal is also a sign that their agenda is money, not safety. How does 2 MORE games mesh with safety.

I can look back at every bad head injury, and look at what the injured did wrong to make it happen.

Ultimately, it comes down to this..it is football, it will be guys hitting each other, at full force..otherwise its not football. If you want to make it 100 percent safe, your in the wrong sport. You can however, play smart to drastically lower the injury risk while still having it be a high level hitting game. Unfortunately, as I said before many ideas that are not only safer, but practical for effectiveness are not embraced because they are seen as taboo by hardcore traditionalists, and the new age pansies just prefer to over panic.

[theMileHighGuy]

It's good on the surface for player safety and whatnot, but honestly it's just another way for refs to control the game. They already determined the outcome of about every game last year, now they have another tool.

[Rancid]

The Ginger Hammer and the Hammerettes strike again!

They are ruining the game.

This will be another inconsistently called penalty by the referees that will change games. It will happen 5-times with no call and then be called on a goal line hand-off as a player jumps over the line for a touchdown-- total nonsense!

[Spice 1]

Backwards thinking. They need to concentrate on properly enforcing the rules they already have in place. How about fining officials for not calling a face mask penalty on running backs?

[Charlie Brown]

The NFL desperately wants to turn the game into a passing league. This will go a long way in eliminating the running back position.

[samparnell]

Hitting with the top of the helmet is already illegal on a defender, isn't it? Hitting with the top of the helmet is a leading cause of head/neck injuries and should be illegal.

[thenewera44]

Safer league is not the goal. Come on guys.

It is about perception. Ok?

They make yet another ambiguous rule that will be a judgment call. Yet another way to extrapolate dollars from ignorant millionaires.

They do it under the GUISE of SAFETY. That is their big thing.

To be honest, them making the league into more of a passing league has actually cause more concussions and more violent hits. The worst, most jarring hits are typically done between the DBs and the WR/TE. Yes, there are collisions all over, but the launch hit is usually on pass plays over the middle etc.

If they want the game to be "safer" they ought to bring back the rules prior to 1978. Is that too much?

Soccer is the most popular game in the world. No, not here, but it is still the most popular game in the world. They have not really changed the rules in that game to make it more "exicitng."

70s football imo is still far better than soccer.

If they want to make the game safer, encourage running plays. When I say safer, I mean head injury safer. Not knees.

No, this is not what this is about. It is about creating a perception that the game is being made safer. They need to show they are pro-active and make no mistake so that when they do go to court over these lawsuits they have tangible proof that they are pro-active.

The owners and league are constantly trying to create these ambiguous rules that are open to interpretation so they can fine X amounts on these players that have millions to give.

That is what this is about.

[fallforward3y+]

It's good on the surface for player safety and whatnot, but honestly it's just another way for refs to control the game. They already determined the outcome of about every game last year, now they have another tool.

Aaah, you may be right man. It will give refs more control of the game with another major penalty they decide to call or not. However, it is probably more about making it a passing league than about controlling the game but still this could be some hidden agenda as well..but people are noticing.

Honestly, the reason refs get away with doing things to control the game is because of this "no excuses" nonsense that is widely believed. The fans that benefit from a bogus call play the no excuses card, then turn around and play the bad call card when they lose due to one.

I'm very annoyed by people who talk about no excuses, making excuses is a "weak" mentality as if major calls don't impact the game, and a team should have to be that much better than the other team that they overcome calls. Most games I believe are within 1 score, so a major call effecting scoring can change the game. In my opinion, its weak to benefit from calls and then play that card.

I understand the point of letting maybe a missed holding, or missed personal foul here and there..that is easier to overcome. But overtime, if you keep calling the fouls against one team and not the other its very hard to overcome. It is scary how I've heard officiating reps say that it is important to them to have the official make the call on the field. Why? There is no practical reason not to have someone else assist in the review of a play to make sure they got it right, or a reason why pass interference and other plays are not reviewable. It's utter nonsense, he practically said that they want refs to be able to control the game.

[fallforward3y+]

Backwards thinking. They need to concentrate on properly enforcing the rules they already have in place. How about fining officials for not calling a face mask penalty on running backs?

This. They need to stop with these pointless fines. For somebody that makes even 500,000 dollars a year, what's a 15,000 dollar fine? Not much

Suspend players from games for illegal plays that actually should be illegal, like helmet spearing a guy who isn't running with the ball yet. Missing a game will do the trick. For their next offense make it 2, the next make it 4, the next make it 8, the next make it 16, then make it 32. That way, well if someone wants to insist that being able to spear a guy in the head who isn't looking is so important..well, they will miss a lot of their career.

If you crack down hard, players will think and weigh things out, and force them to figure out a way to dislodge the ball without helmet spearing.

Ironically, we would see more hits that dislodge a ball if you take away the helmet hits on defenseless receivers. If you drop your shoulder onto the ball, its much more likely for it to pop out.

If anyone actually believes that the Harrisons of the league hate the rules because it will hurt their chances of dislodging the ball they are among the most gullable people I've ever met. They just want a chance to make a highlight w/o having to do something difficult..but just hit a guy who isn't running w/the ball.

Going for the ball when it is in the air, or hitting your shoulder onto the ball is much more likely to result in an incomplete pass than a high up big hit.

However, there should be no penalty for unintentional helmet contact, and if a receiver tries to put themselves in a spot where their head will get hit to draw a flag, any concussion they get is their own fault, period.

[fallforward3y+]

Safer league is not the goal. Come on guys.

It is about perception. Ok?

They make yet another ambiguous rule that will be a judgment call. Yet another way to extrapolate dollars from ignorant millionaires.

They do it under the GUISE of SAFETY. That is their big thing.

To be honest, them making the league into more of a passing league has actually cause more concussions and more violent hits. The worst, most jarring hits are typically done between the DBs and the WR/TE. Yes, there are collisions all over, but the launch hit is usually on pass plays over the middle etc.

If they want the game to be "safer" they ought to bring back the rules prior to 1978. Is that too much?

Soccer is the most popular game in the world. No, not here, but it is still the most popular game in the world. They have not really changed the rules in that game to make it more "exicitng."

70s football imo is still far better than soccer.

If they want to make the game safer, encourage running plays. When I say safer, I mean head injury safer. Not knees.

No, this is not what this is about. It is about creating a perception that the game is being made safer. They need to show they are pro-active and make no mistake so that when they do go to court over these lawsuits they have tangible proof that they are pro-active.

The owners and league are constantly trying to create these ambiguous rules that are open to interpretation so they can fine X amounts on these players that have millions to give.

That is what this is about.

Another great point. The hits that cause injuries the most are on over the middle pass plays. Also, it will cause more hits to be made from a longer range which causes more injury...the players will come at each other from further distances.

I remember playing in high school, tackling a power back with 3 or 5 yards of steam didn't even hurt at all..but tackling a speed back who had 10 or 15(from a reverse), that hurt worse.

The kickoff rule is the only rule they made that makes perfect sense towards player safety, and doesn't appear to have some agenda relating to money or changing the game(unless Goodell hates the Bears, lol) Kickoffs are definitely the most likely place to get hurt, because guys are running at eachother with 40 yards of steam. However, I ask this..if his goal is to make it so a kickoff is never done why even have kickoffs at all? Why not just do away with them and give a team the ball at the 20 after every score. It's not like kicking it from the 35 is going to eliminate returns completely, its only 5 more yards.

It's not just about protection from law suits, its about it being a passing league. They want the NFL to become a passing league because they think its what fans want to see, and they are trying to appeal to everyone...basically losing fans of the real game to appeal to fans who likely never will embrace it.

The control of the game agenda may be part of it also, they want to be able to help the more popular team win..they were terrified of watching Atlanta, an unpopular team almost make the Superbowl. If they had faced BAL and Lewis's last ride in the Superbowl, we may have had a repeat of SB 40

We need to bring a lot of attention to every terrible call the refs make, so they are so in fear of bad publicity they never do it again...and stop attending games if they continue to ruin the NFL. This is not basketball, the game involves hitting...and it is not the WWE where it is rigged for the more popular team to win. It is football, REAL competition, REALLY trying to win, and players HITTING EACHOTHER and playing each other the best they can trying to win. They may not hit at full force for practical strategy, a different tackling method that can better work for them for instance. but NEVER for the sake of not trying their hardest to make it "safer".

[captainbronco]

soooo is the runner supposed to just stand straight up and get tackled???

[fallforward3y+]

soooo is the runner supposed to just stand straight up and get tackled???

for now, they are saying he just can't lower his helmet at the defender..but he can lower his shoulder...but next year I bet it will be "no leaning forward/lowering your shoulder or head at all" even though that's really the best way to not absorb the hit's blow so it makes no sense for safety....it's probably just some plan to make it hard for ball carriers to fall forward, so running becomes ineffective...then it becomes all about the pass

the further along they go, the more they are showing their agenda...but like fools, people outside of football are buying into it.

Not everybody knows about football or likes it, and that's fine by me I wouldn't expect them to learn about these things if they had no interest. BUT if your going to start making all these concerns and talk about changing the game, you better do some research and you WILL have contempt from real football fans/players if you try to change the game regardless of how good your intentions may be.

[captainbronco]

for now, they are saying he just can't lower his helmet at the defender..but he can lower his shoulder...but next year I bet it will be "no leaning forward/lowering your shoulder or head at all" even though that's really the best way to not absorb the hit's blow so it makes no sense for safety....it's probably just some plan to make it hard for ball carriers to fall forward, so running becomes ineffective...then it becomes all about the pass




the further along they go, the more they are showing their agenda...but like fools, people outside of football are buying into it.

Not everybody knows about football or likes it, and that's fine by me I wouldn't expect them to learn about these things if they had no interest. BUT if your going to start making all these concerns and talk about changing the game, you better do some research and you WILL have contempt from real football fans/players if you try to change the game regardless of how good your intentions may be.

true it just sucks i love watching aggressive RBs just lower their battering ram and just bulldoze through people guess we wont be seeing those types of run anymore

[fallforward3y+]

It really does suck, well I guess we can always hope the rule doesn't get passed. That or we can just hope RBs don't take it into account and say "well, we don't lower our heads INTO defenders anyway", an just lower their shoulder with their head to the side like they usually do.......Maybe it won't impact the game, and we can still enjoy good running....atleast until another one comes.

Players and fans need to protest it, fans could say they won't attend games until this agenda stops happening. Players could even hold out over this. If it goes too far, they should just go play in semi-pro or UFL leagues..or Canada and Australia.

In a few years, the NFL may become completely unwatchable.