NFLs Stricter Enforcement on Dangerous Hits (leagues, fan, win, games)

[McGowdog]

So... it seems like I've heard the buzz on this prior to this last weekends' run of games. Something to the effect, "Should players be suspended for a game or two and not just fined monetarily?"

So the next thing you know, the media is talking about how this last weekend was one of the most violent in history as far as dangerous hits.

I hear some buzz on these sports shows about how they need to solve this... protection of the unprotected receivers; bring the strike zone down a bit lower to avoid some of these launchings and helmet to helmet hits.

I heard on the Dan Patrick Show... one of the best assessments on this; You've got an unknown defensive back on a bad team wanting to make a name for himself. What's better than watching your teams' defender separate the receiver from the ball? But the instant you see the oppositions' defender take a late shot out of bounds on one of your favorite receivers, it's a different story.

So... they've protected the QB somewhat... but now they are taking it a step further.

What do you think will become of this? How do you police this? They have glamorized these hits for years in the NFL and there are shows on ESPN dedicated to these wicked hits. They got to "blow you up" and get "Jacked Up" to make the highlights. On the one hand, it looks good and sounds good to hear that hit on the TV or up in the stands. But for the most part, can anybody tackle anymore?

Steve Atwater once hit his own player and the receiver and they were all three laid out for a minute.

What's gonna become of this? There's talk about Roger Goodell reiterating that the rules need not change, but just get enforced.

I think the media has made a ton of money and ratings by sensationalizing the whole thing... and at least Dan Patrick has the stones to admit it.

James Harrison threatened to retire his 51.2 Million dollar contract for getting a fine on his recent hit against the Browns. When I think about his dilemma, I just can't comment. I for one don't know what it's like to have that kind of contract and also don't know what it takes to earn that kind of money. I would assume that it's about 50% mental... to just shut up and do your job and wipe that mascara off your face and do what you need to do to collect your check would seem to be reasonable. Make the tackle and separate the player from the ball whenever you get the chance. But to enjoy getting that hit on a defenseless receiver in a somewhat vulnerable position while their catching the ball over the middle is something well entrenched with more and more teams now.

To me, it would seem to be all about the bottom line... do what you need to do in order to win games and don't kill each other every chance you get. We'll see what comes of this. One player was going off about the league becoming a flag football league in five years.

[Hp1167]

You hear very few players in support of this latest move.

Enough said.

[McGowdog]

Agreed. Two quarterbacks, in fact, voiced their respective opinions that they know what they're signing up for and that the game isn't for "wussies" or something to that effect... Ben Roethlisberger and Tom Brady weighing in.

But what would QBs with less than superior protection say? Cutler?

In any case, this has gone beyond protecting the QB, but still favors the offense.

Is this partly an insurance issue? Do we need Earl Campbell, Troy Aikman, Steve Young, and Knowshon Moreno to weigh in here?

So if what you're sayin' is true...

Originally Posted by Hp1167

You hear very few players in support of this latest move.

Enough said.

... then this issue and any talk of insurance and concern for long-term damage is off the table of discussion for the NFL Players' Association should a strike go down in the near future?

__________________________________________________ ______

Couple of other points here;

Having the league define in explicit detail what is considered an illegal hit and also an illegal block would seem in order here. Maybe there is a lot left up to interpretation. It's obvious that a chop block and a helmet to helmet hit is off the table. Some crackback blocks can be dangerous and tackles that involve blowing up a defenseless receiver, say in the ribs/solar plexus area, going over the middle can be pretty dangerous too.



But can the players and players association weigh in on the decision of what should be on the table and what should not be?

Then you've got to consider what's going on at the college level, high school level and on down. Do these younger players not emulate what's going on in the NFL?

Where do we draw the line?



In another thread, some talk of using the equipment as a weapon has been discussed.

I like seeing good defense... low scoring games. I look at Champ Bailey as a reference. That guy is aging and has lost a couple of steps now, but this guy can tackle like nobody I've seen and can change the way offenses run. Yet, I can't remember when I've seen him tackle with his helmet or take someone out at the knees. He just has good fundamentals and gets the job done.

Do we care about Steve Young's and Troy Aikman's long term memory? Probably not. But should the League?

[DOUBLE H]

Solid comments by McGowdog as always.

Regarding McGowdog's comments regarding " the media has made a ton of money and ratings sensationalizing the whole thing", um, if I'm not mistaken the NFL hasn't done too badly with their NFL Videos regarding this subject. They've made a few bucks themselves.

[McGowdog]

Well thanks H.

It's a topic that's been shoved down our throats this week, that along with "Will the Oregon ducks be upset?" Yeah right! ... and "How bout them Giants and Rangers?! How bout them Giants and Rangers? Just one win away... from a tied series! I actually would like to see some new teams in the World Series this year.

But back to football. I've not chosen a side here... yet. I'm just observing and reporting. I'm listening to the sportscasters and the media and the players... pretty much make a mockery of Roger Goodell and the officiating crews' upcoming attempt to crack down on these rulings or the enforcement of what's already in place.

James Harrison; "Gee, I'm not backing down on my original statement and no appology necessary, I guess... but I guess I'm not yet willing to trade 75K for 6 Million just yet."

How do I feel about it? I couldn't afford to attend a game these days anyway, but will gladly watch my team make a fool of themselves on national television so long as I can watch some good yummy season-ending violence. Let's watch that again in slow-mo... shall we?

I see the players and ex-players make a compelling case that there's no way to make these hits safer by having a guy lower the strike zone because by the time they aim at the ballcarrier's chest, he's crunched down and what was once his chest is still another head to head contact. Ron Jaworski made a good case that it's easy to follow the hits around the flow of the ball, but what about the hits away from the camera? Like some of those on special teams? Game film. It's hard to go undetected time and time again.

As far as insurance goes... I think there's enough money floating around the NFL to figure this out. Where exactly does this "fine/FedX money" go? To the owners' or the leagues' pocket? Or does it go into the NFL Insurance/Medical/Aftercare fund? Maybe they could start up an Injured Player/relief fund or something. IDK. I'm a fan of the sport. What I care most about is seeing my team and the underdog win.

Oh, I actually heard Brandon Marshall say he let's them go when his QB lays him out to get killed going across the middle. He says a rcvr going across the middle ought to know better and it's up him to make the catch or take out the safety and let the ball go... then you explain that in game film later.

Interesting stuff, this game.

Oh... and you players... keep talkin'! <eating popcorn icon>