NFL Might Suspend Players for Violent Hits

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

The way I understand it it's all about "intent" to hit with the helmet. I think there's a fine line between two large athletes running at full throttle, leading with the helmet and a violent collision that makes helmet contact first.

I hope the refs won't go to the extreme with this new ruling and penalize a player simply because he laid somone's ass out. It is still football.

Yeah me either. Would the hit a year ago on Portis fall into the catagory?

Safety is one thing but to inact rules that keep defenders from doing their job is crazy. Can't touch the WR, can't hit WR, can't horse collar WR, soon to be can't try to take WR's legs out from under him. Hey why don't they just put flags on the WR's? every one else is fair game, but QB's and WR's will wear flags as in flag football. No hitting. Get the flag before the ball is thrown it's a sack. touch a flag prior to the WR catching the ball it's a foul. Grab it after and he's down where the flag was grabbed.

[Kope]

**** EDIT****

Deleted a big rant Just not a fan of the Protect the investment - I mean offensive player - at the expense of the game. Nothing to see here...move along.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

The way I understand it it's all about "intent" to hit with the helmet. I think there's a fine line between two large athletes running at full throttle, leading with the helmet and a violent collision that makes helmet contact first.

I hope the refs won't go to the extreme with this new ruling and penalize a player simply because he laid somone's ass out. It is still football.

To me Intent just means "have they done this before and is it a habit?" If yes then it's clear they think it is OK to play recklessly and truly want to hurt someone. Last I checked the game is not about hurting the opposing team's players (even if they are Cowboys).

[MTK]

Am I alone in thinking a lot of folks are making a much bigger deal out of this than it really is?

Last week was a bad week as far as dangerous hits go, the NFL is making like they're dropping the hammer on this, but in reality once the dust settles they know that big hits are a part of the game. That's not going to change. They're just trying to reduce the potential for the major injuries... concussions, paralysis, etc. It's a hot button issue for the league right now and they have to at least put up the front that they are aware of it and trying to address it.

It's not going to become flag football. Yes hitting is a part of the game, but the league is right in being concerned about traumatic injuries.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Who's "Soup"?

And, in my opinion, we got lucky on that Jarmon hit. It looked clearly like hlelmet to helmet to me. I think so long as you don't lead with your helmet you should be ok. Wrapping up is the more fundamental way to do it, but really it's the knock out shots that cause the turnovers. I think more is being made of this right now than will actually come out of it.

It's the knock-out shots that gets these guys on the jacked-up replays. Players love it as long as they're not the ones getting jacked.

[Swarley]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Am I alone in thinking a lot of folks are making a much bigger deal out of this than it really is?

Last week was a bad week as far as dangerous hits go, the NFL is making like they're dropping the hammer on this, but in reality once the dust settles they know that big hits are a part of the game. That's not going to change. They're just trying to reduce the potential for the major injuries... concussions, paralysis, etc. It's a hot button issue for the league right now and they have to at least put up the front that they are aware of it and trying to address it.

It's not going to become flag football. Yes hitting is a part of the game, but the league is right in being concerned about traumatic injuries.

I'm with you. After reading this on the Redskins blog Ive realized we've pretty much seen this story play our before.

Originally Posted by Redskins Blog

Back in November of 2007, two NFL players -- in two separate games -- were fined for helmet-to-helmet hits; the week prior, a young quarterback named Matt Schaub was concussed by a similar hit. The NFL reacted with shock and horror, the director of football operations said that the league would be paying special attention to shots against defenseless receivers, and officiating crews were told to eject players from the game for helmet-to-helmet hits.

Feel free to stop me when this sounds familiar.

Redskins Blog -- The Official Blog of the Washington Redskins

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Honestly I watched the video and thought it was not as bad as it ended up. Yeah it's helmet to helmet but I'm confused as to how the WR ended up with a concussion because it really didn't look like the hit was that hard. Helmets tap and WR goes to the ground.

Now look at the Desean Jackson hit. That to me was vicious but it looked like the shoulder hit not the helmet.

I think it goes back to this... if the players don't want to subject themselves to these type of hits they would get out of football and use their college degree. I find it funny that it's the NFL and who knows congress? that are trying to change the rules but the players themselves and owners are not. I have yet to hear a player get on tv and say we need to change the rules, or something needs to be done. All I keep hearing is "hey it's football, thats what we signed up for it could happen to any one of us."

You don't even need to get hit in the head to suffer a concussion. The violent whiplash motion of a big hit is enough to jar the brain against the inside of the skull.

[MTK]

YouTube - Sport Science: NFL Concussions

[Longtimefan]

IOTO there's a way to play the game where hard-hits can be just as inclusive as form tackling. However, what I do feel is reason for concern are the hits that appear to be blatant and administered with the intent to injure or maim. To hear a player say "It's not his intention to injure, but to hurt" creates a statement of intent difficult to decipher.

Now, I know the way the game is being played today differs greatly from the past, but consider when the protections players wore at one time would in no way suffice to adaquately protect them from the violence we see exhibited in todays game. Listening to players defend their actions on the way hits are applied now, basically saying they have no problem with it, I wonder what their stance would be if they were playing without the safeguards like their predecessors.

[MTK]

Harrison returns to Steelers after cooling-off day | ajc.com

Shocker. Probably didn't take long to realize that walking away from a $50M contract wouldn't be the smartest thing in the world.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Meriweather's hit is what they should flag because how he launched himself up towards Heaps head and lowered his head.

yeah it is my understanding that you can not lead/launch leading with your helmet to a defenseless player. once a player establishes himself as a runner, hes fair game.

also, reading the exact words of another rule regarding the helmet to helmet hits, it doesnt matter if you hit a guy with your helmet in his chest initially, if your helmet then rides up and hits him in his helmet . . its helmet to helmet.

the merriweather hit was one that i think squarely falls into an illegal hit on 2 levels. it was helmet to helmet and he launched himself leading with his helmet into a defenseless receiver.

weve seen consussions happen on all types of hits. dallas clark got that concussion from a wrap up type tackle but his head did the slightest whiplash thing into the ground. that was a routine tackle in the nfl, clark still got concused. we cant even point nor can the skins coaching staff point to the hit that gave cooley a concussion.

also, i think the rise in reported concussions is def an attribute of team doctors become more aware of the signs of concussion as well as push to immediately pull players out and have them evaluated teh second a concussion is suspected.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by jdlea

I personally think the Cribbs hit was dirty, but the on Massaquoi ended up worse because he braced for the hit. On the Cribbs hit, he was going down and Harrison didn't need to do it, so I'd say that him going to helmet to helmet on that one was a dirty hit.

So if MM had time to brace himself, it wasn't a hit on a "defenseless" player.

Not defending Harrison, but the only "illegal" hit I saw was the hit on Heap. The others just looked like football.

[over the mountain]

from what i read, cribbs was the "qb" in wildcat so he is an established runner and it is legal to go helmet to helmet.

massaqoui (sp?) was a defenseless receiver so the helmet to helmet and leading with your helmet rule applies.

does anyone know the criteria for when a defenseless receiver turns into an established ball runner? is when he takes 2 steps on the field with possession of the ball? makes a "football" move?

i fear for some overreaction by the refs this week, then by seasons end things will be balanced back.

has any skin gotten a fine yet this year? i cant think of one

[SmootSmack]

Video submitted by NFL to teams outlining what hits are legal, and which are not

NFL Videos: Player safety

[Kindoy]

didn't read the whole thread but here's my view on the issue:

Player safety should always be first. we can say the league is getting watered down, but back then nobody knew any better. we know now that these concussions are causing life long injuries down the road.

i dont know that suspensions are in the best interest of the game however. i dont want Laron thinking twice about putting Hester on his ass this weekend. I truly believe these head to head hits are not intentional, as the decision to hit someone and how is made in less than a second. besides, if i wanted to take someone out i would go at their knees... head to head injuries put both parties at risk, not just the guy on the receiving end.

concussions are nearly unstoppable... it doesnt matter where you're hit. players are always trying to hit someone as hard as they can, and instead of telling them "dont do this or else" the NFL should be looking for better technology to protect these players when it does happen. i think the best solution for the game overall is better helmet technology (better padding on the inside, etc.) not a green sticker and not suspensions or fines.