Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Valparaiso, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    15,439

    Lightbulb My proposal to the NFL

    Watch this Youtube video and note the helmets, shoulder pads and other padding worn. Change the rules to allow only helmets and padding like this or consistent with this time period, instead of the helmets and padding players use today. This will change the way players play and decreasing the amount of concussions. It will increase broken noses and other facial injuries. But by taking the ultimate protections away that make the body into a weapon, players will make subtle changes to protect themselves.

    In concert with the above changes, eliminate all "defenseless" player infractions that have been instituted over the last 10 years. That includes the--downright silly in some cases--special rules to protect QBs. Keep the ability for the QB to slide (as a player always could just down the ball), but allow some judgement area for incidental contact by players who cannot stop to avoid contact with the sliding player. Also eliminate the travesty of the game special rules that allow the QB to throw the ball away, including the "spike" and throwing the ball beyond the LOS from outside the pocket. Making contact with a WR after he touches a pass... legal.

    Absolutely positively keep personal foul penalties on rush men that take more than 2 steps after the QB releases the ball to smash him or cases where players are going beyond playing the game to inflict punishment.

    The effects of these changes:

    1. Fewer concussions. Not a lot fewer. But probably fewer.
    2. More facial injuries. Broken noses. Lacerations. Eye injuries.
    3. Slightly fewer injuries and slightly lesser degree of injuries. By leaving players less protected, they will be a bit more guarded in contact situations. This may have no effect on joint injuries. But high speed contact injuries in general will be down.
    4. Crazier TV shots of guys with bloody noses, facial cuts and stitches.
    5. Fewer penalties, particularly game changing PF penalties.
    6. Increased fan satisfaction with the results of games by eliminating "punishment doesn't fit the crime" penalties than have seeped into today's games.
    7. Somewhat less QB and offensive emphasis on passing and more on running. QBs being less babied would have to be tougher and more durable, reducing passing efficiency.
    8. DL guys could be just a little crazier on the pass rush without the QB protection rules.

    Who's in with me?
    Wouldn't it be great if we booted the 200 lawyers from the House and Senate and replaced them with economists? That way, we'd stop harming our economy with laws that would apply to the politicians, too.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Other side of the world...seriously
    Posts
    3,327
    It would take some getting used to but eventually, we all might come around. Watch this video if you have a moment. The NFL hits here would almost ALL get flagged in today's game. There is no denying that we have completely changed the hard hitting NFL from what it once was. I understand the reasons for that. The Rugby hits in this video are decent but totally different. Generally, you'll see much more fundamental tackling in professional Rubby- guys wrapping up, etc. but of course the hits are far less violent.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    On a rock out in the cold.
    Posts
    1,681
    I actually laughed out loud.

    In a billion dollar industry which is currently under a gigantic "player safety" debacle, you want to devolve the game back to some of it's earliest forms? sorry but you can't snap your fingers and have athletes like this suddenly go back to backyard/park league intensity.

    I agree with the reduced concussions though. It's probably not going to get listed on the injury report after the players taken away on a stretcher without feeling in some of his extremities.
    A man like Emery doesn't need a search firm. He is the search firm. - Jon Greenberg.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    3,155
    Have to agree with dirk...you're not going to change the mentality of guys who learned how to play the game one way for their entire life with an overnight rule change.

    I do agree that the hard plastic pads / armor have done more to increase the violence of the game than anything else.

    The thing that kicks me is that, as a former motorcyclist. they say you should replace your helmet even if you accidentally drop it. That it could be compromised and you want that helmet 100% when you really need it. To the best of my knowledge players play with the same helmet all year. At least I know that is the case at the lower levels of football. There is NO way that a helmet taken at the start of the season will have the same structural integrity as one that was used through 12 or 16 games.

    Therefore not only do you have the compound damage on the brain, you have a weakening of the structure of the helmet which leads to taking more trauma from the same hits later down the road.

    But I imagine since football helmets run probably $400-$800 a shot or more they absolutely don't even want to think about having to replace them regularly.
    The two-wheeled scourge of the streets

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Valparaiso, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    15,439
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
    In a billion dollar industry which is currently under a gigantic "player safety" debacle, you want to devolve the game back to some of it's earliest forms? sorry but you can't snap your fingers and have athletes like this suddenly go back to backyard/park league intensity.
    I can show you evidence that your statement is true. Just look at the current NFL. How are NFL Ss doing at not hitting "defenseless" WRs extended to make a catch, which is now illegal? How are DL guys doing at not tackling QBs by the knee or below (also illegal)? Or not touching the QB's helmet (illegal as well)? Or abiding by the "one step" rule (or whatever it is) about not hitting QBs?

    Is my idea realistic? Very likely not. But don't stand here and say that the NFL won't change the game. They've been doing it for years now and continue doing it every year. The NFL is evolving into a game where tough guys are put in a position of backing off or making a play (that they've made all their football lives) and drawing a major penalty for it. Is that what you tune in on Sundays to see?

    Why is my idea so unrealistic? Because it would require the NFL brass to admit that they are not the geniuses they think they are. They think they can minimize violence and injury with legislation without changing the integrity of the game. They might be able to do the first part, but the part 2 naturally follows and cannot be avoided.

    I say... NO Roger Goodell, watching the greatest NFL players having to back off from making a hit turns me off. Seeing players dance around trying to avoid illegal 15-yard penalties (and still getting them anyway a lot of the time) is not my idea of NFL football.

    As often happens, power players think they're so smart that they can just legislate things with the best of intentions. Guys get head an face injuries with the leather helmets. So let's allow hard shell helmets and face masks. That results in players learning to be absolutely reckless, which--despite technology advances--may result in even more concussions and injuries in general. So what do we do now? Uhhh... Let's institute defenseless player rules and give the QBs exceptions where they can throw the ball away. These things are making a mockery of the game. And the current trend suggests that such travesties will continue to grow.

    How ludicrous is it that we have a major penalty (10 yards and loss of down) for "intentional grounding" and yet today, QBs intentionally ground the ball commonly without consequences?

    I believe my solution...
    a) Let's players play, resulting in a more exciting game
    b) Reduces high speed contact injuries somewhat, including concussions
    c) Eliminates penalties that turn good football plays into major penalties, which is a travesty
    d) Removes the need for so many rule changes year after year, which is confusing for everyone

    Will players immediately change their behavior with new headgear limitations? Probably not right away. But once you've gone flying face first into some other hard object in a pile a few times, players will learn to back off a bit and protect themselves.
    Wouldn't it be great if we booted the 200 lawyers from the House and Senate and replaced them with economists? That way, we'd stop harming our economy with laws that would apply to the politicians, too.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    "Cornfields and Crick-ets forever"
    Posts
    11,383
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikefive View Post
    I believe my solution...
    a) Let's players play, resulting in a more exciting game
    b) Reduces high speed contact injuries somewhat, including concussions
    c) Eliminates penalties that turn good football plays into major penalties, which is a travesty
    d) Removes the need for so many rule changes year after year, which is confusing for everyone
    But, as you noted yourself, it also (probably):

    trades more instances of an invisible injury (brain trauma)
    for more instances of visible injuries (broken noses, facial fractures, eye damage)


    Not going to fly when the NFL is desperately fighting a battle of public perception.
    The word "hero" is frequently abused badly. This is a real hero.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Metrowest Boston
    Posts
    11,260
    I've been saying it for years, just remove the face masks. If they don't choose to do so, make these ridiculous calls on QBs (see Week 17 - McClellin tripping over Rodgers) and defenseless penalties reviewable.

    Simple.
    The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    On a rock out in the cold.
    Posts
    1,681
    Quote Originally Posted by Moriarty View Post
    But, as you noted yourself, it also (probably):

    trades more instances of an invisible injury (brain trauma)
    for more instances of visible injuries (broken noses, facial fractures, eye damage)


    Not going to fly when the NFL is desperately fighting a battle of public perception.
    IF i'm not mistaken, the reason they switched from the leather helmets to the plastic ones was frigging skull fractures. That was in 1950. Try telling me that 74 years later players aren't immensely stronger, faster and more aggressive. Football was a job for the players back then. Football is a life for the players now.

    Football has a problem. It's trying to reign in a "bigger,faster,stronger" mentality with rule changes and a C.Y.A. mentality. Are all the rule changes over the top? Sure, but getting someone paralyzed/killed on the field isn't going to solve or help anything.
    A man like Emery doesn't need a search firm. He is the search firm. - Jon Greenberg.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    College Station, TX
    Posts
    5,589
    http://www.dudeiwantthat.com/outdoor...eeping-bag.asp

    if everyone had to wear these, it would help slow down the game.
    Slightly better Jay, different day

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Fantasy Football Rankings


Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.