2018 Rule Changes - First Impressions

[HardRightEdge]

I understand the intent of the rule, but whoever decided on the definition and enforcement of it, seems to have never watched an NFL game in their life.

The owners watch their teams. How closely they watch or how insightful they may be is debateable.

There's one play all of them have likely seen, and it just occurred to me it may have been the tipping point in making these panic changes:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

A injury like that to a budding star is bad for business. Their ultimate fear is a guy dying on the field.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The players are starting to weigh in on the new rule. Have to agree with Sherman and others, this is just a really poor decision made by the NFL to this point.

https://ninerswire.usatoday.com/201...ssible-utm_sourcenotifutm_campaignninerswire/

 

[Mondio]

All I can think is they want to see eyes up, not down.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

All I can think is they want to see eyes up, not down.

and a referee at an odd angle is going to determine that in a split second?

I see tackling just happening like this in the future....

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

How is this even remotely a penalty? Picture perfect form tackle.

https://twitter.com/JamesBradySBN/status/1030988030088237059

 

[Mondio]

How is this even remotely a penalty? Picture perfect form tackle.

https://twitter.com/JamesBradySBN/status/1030988030088237059

If they are in the regular season, this league won't last long

 

[azrsx05]

The NFL is trying to control the game too much. They are going to rule themselves out of business I understand they are trying to protect players, but it's not a good thing when the next day everyone is talking about dumb flags and subjective decisions the refs have to make, instead of the games themselves. Nfl will follow boxing if they continue to make stupid decisions with rules

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This reminds me of Nascar deciding that high speeds are just too dangerous. "Races will now be run at 55 mph. and your car will be made out of Nerf material only." Injuries are a part of football, crack down on the intentional ones with the use of a spotter in the box, but making players tackle in ways that they aren't used to is not only silly, but is probably going to lead to injuries itself with twisted knees and pulled hammies as guy try to contort their bodies to tackle in unorthodox ways.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

How is this even remotely a penalty? Picture perfect form tackle.

https://twitter.com/JamesBradySBN/status/1030988030088237059

It's absolutely terrible if plays like that result in a personal foul penalty.

 

[Mondio]

The only thing I can figure is his eyes weren't "up" when he tackled him. neck flexed with compression is the most dangerous position a person can be in. It's what paralyzes and potentially could kill someone. That said, they've allowed that to be a legal tackle forever in this league. It's not going to change overnight and I think it needs to start lower down, which is what it should have been doing all along, and save the obvious stuff for now. IMO they don't need anymore rules. call the obvious head hunting plays that have been "spearing" since I ever stepped foot on a football field. That's all they need to call. You can't call every tackle a defender isn't looking thru his man while he tackles, this game will go nowhere and take 6 hours to complete. There will be more penalty yards than actual offensive production. and if you're only going to call some of them what's the point? isn't this about player safety? only going to keep some of them safe?

If they want to attack this "eyes up" thing, fine players after the fact, which I guess they can't without a new CBA. But this 15 yard personal foul for what looks like a pretty decent football play is garbage. He didn't plant the crown of his helmet in the guys chest or earhole and launch at him. He did everything he could to get his head to the side and hit him with his shoulder. I've seen more than a handful of terrible calls with this so far this preseason and I've hardly watched any football yet. I'm afraid of what this is going to mean in the regular season. I'm worried about what they're doing to the game. I'm worried that this rule is rather arbitrary and will be devastating not only to the flow and excitement of the game, but also to the integrity. The officials can have a huge impact with this call, and toss in gambling on top of it, once most people no longer feel the game is "honest" they'll go away. You'll have hard core gamblers interested maybe and Price's dad and that's about it.

 

[Poppa San]

How is this even remotely a penalty? Picture perfect form tackle.

https://twitter.com/JamesBradySBN/status/1030988030088237059

I'm in the camp where the officials are also learning how to call it and are being overly stringent in the preseason. By mid season I'd expect nary a whisper about a play like this. What will get wrongly flagged will be the highlight hits that look worse than they really are. Big hits by "dirty" players. Also marginal hits against star players. What will get missed are the hits on the 5th string WR or 3rd string TE on a bad team. Those guys rarely get the calls.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm in the camp where the officials are also learning how to call it and are being overly stringent in the preseason. By mid season I'd expect nary a whisper about a play like this. What will get wrongly flagged will be the highlight hits that look worse than they really are. Big hits by "dirty" players. Also marginal hits against star players. What will get missed are the hits on the 5th string WR or 3rd string TE on a bad team. Those guys rarely get the calls.

Didn't they say the same thing about the catch rule?

Really, the problem isn't just with the Refs making the calls, it's the rule itself. Throw on top of that having to rely on refs to make the call in a split second, possible from a bad angle and with no review.

 

[Poppa San]

Most of the rules are judgement calls. Quick off the snap or offsides? Many PI calls and noncalls, holding exists on almost any play by the OL . Only the takedowns in the open are sometimes called. This is another. This rule would have been unnecessary if they'd've ejected immediately in seasons past for hits like Davante got. IMO the catch rule was a lame excuse by the league to cover up for a ref that made a bad call (Calvin Johnson is the one I think of) and stretched the interpretation for some undisclosed reason. Until then, everyone knew what a catch was. Same thing with the tuck rule - covering for poor reffing.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The only thing I can figure is his eyes weren't "up" when he tackled him. neck flexed with compression is the most dangerous position a person can be in. It's what paralyzes and potentially could kill someone. That said, they've allowed that to be a legal tackle forever in this league. It's not going to change overnight and I think it needs to start lower down, which is what it should have been doing all along, and save the obvious stuff for now. IMO they don't need anymore rules. call the obvious head hunting plays that have been "spearing" since I ever stepped foot on a football field. That's all they need to call. You can't call every tackle a defender isn't looking thru his man while he tackles, this game will go nowhere and take 6 hours to complete. There will be more penalty yards than actual offensive production. and if you're only going to call some of them what's the point? isn't this about player safety? only going to keep some of them safe?

If they want to attack this "eyes up" thing, fine players after the fact, which I guess they can't without a new CBA. But this 15 yard personal foul for what looks like a pretty decent football play is garbage. He didn't plant the crown of his helmet in the guys chest or earhole and launch at him. He did everything he could to get his head to the side and hit him with his shoulder. I've seen more than a handful of terrible calls with this so far this preseason and I've hardly watched any football yet. I'm afraid of what this is going to mean in the regular season. I'm worried about what they're doing to the game. I'm worried that this rule is rather arbitrary and will be devastating not only to the flow and excitement of the game, but also to the integrity. The officials can have a huge impact with this call, and toss in gambling on top of it, once most people no longer feel the game is "honest" they'll go away. You'll have hard core gamblers interested maybe and Price's dad and that's about it.

While I understand the "eyes down" theory, is a ref really going to see that on every play, both the tackler(s) and the runners? I think that again is asking for too much on a split second call. However, I agree with you on the idea that they need to stop messing with the definition and concentrate on enforcement of head hunting. Now I know you don't like instant reply, but its a pretty simple fix. Just like in college, its at the discretion of the booth to look at a questionable play, whether its flagged or not and try to remedy it quickly.

 

[HardRightEdge]

How is this even remotely a penalty? Picture perfect form tackle.

https://twitter.com/JamesBradySBN/status/If 1030988030088237059

That's bad.

As poorly as this rule is written, being vague and all encompassing, the problem here is the ref whiffed on the call. Evidently he thought there was helmet contact when there was not.

The exact wording Under Rule 12 - Player Contact, Section 2 - Personal Fouls:

ARTICLE 8. USE OF THE HELMET. It is a foul if a player lowers his head to initiate and make contact with his helmet against an opponent.

That's all there is. No qualifications, ifs, ands or buts.

What does that even mean? Are refs supposes to interpret intent? I don't think so, given the calls we've seen and the fact the NFL has done a good job taking mind reading out of the rules. Or are they supposed to interpret intent after all? It does not say.

So, a player (offense or defense) lowers his head to initiate contact with his shoulder in good form tackling and just happens to contact the other guy with his helmet as that other player moves in the split seconds between when the tackle begins and when it ends.

I don't think it's fully appreciated quite yet that this rule is supposed to keep players from injuring themselves as well as others. I posted the video of Shazier already.

Then there is this:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Finley goes low to protect himself as he sees the defender closing; the defender strikes him with his shoulder and Finley strikes his shoulder with his helmt.

Who gets the flag on that one? The runner is not defenseless, the defender does not hit with shoulder. According to this rule, Finley gets the flag.

What a mess.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think one of the toughest aspects of this new rule that I have a hard time swallowing and has been now brought up by players and the media is just the simple fact of "How do you unteach guys who grew up and honed their craft tackling or running with the ball in the way that they are now getting flagged for?"

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That's bad.

When it will get really bad, is when this kind of inconsistency costs someone a regular season game.

As poorly as this rule is written, being vague and all encompassing, the problem here is the ref whiffed on the call. Evidently he thought there was helmet contact when there was not.

Agreed. The way the rule is written, it leaves way too much grey area for mistakes to be made. If the NFL sticks with the rule and adds "such calls are reviewable", its going to slow the game down to a screeching halt, simply because I think that will make the refs even more flag happy, with the notion that they don't want to miss one and let the booth get it right. Such an easy fix really, call the NCAA and get them to tell you what they do.

I don't think it's fully appreciated quite yet that this rule is supposed to keep players from injuring themselves as well as others.

What a mess.

It is a mess and the intent is great, an effort to try and get rid of head hunting all together. However, the application just plain sucks. Football and tackling is a violent game, guys are going to get hurt, head up or head down, they need to realize they can't turn this into flag football, but there are ways to encourage players to not intentionally go after someone with the crown of their helmet or really in anyway that appears to be outside the scope of a clean tackle. If a player is deemed guilty of such, the team is penalized on the field and the player is ejected and fined a hefty amount.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think one of the toughest aspects of this new rule that I have a hard time swallowing and has been now brought up by players and the media is just the simple fact of "How do you unteach guys who grew up and honed their craft tackling or running with the ball in the way that they are now getting flagged for?"

Yes, they are trying to change the styles of play.

Let's take another look at that Finley clip a couple of post above.

Finley lowered his head to defend himself and initiated contact with his helmet. What would he be expected to do under this new rule? Stay eyes up, shoulders up, and trust that the defender will just wrap up and not drill him in the rib cage or take out his knees?

Conversely, if that defender is supposed to stay eyes up, shoulders up so as to not inadvertly strike with the helmet he has to trust that Finley will not lower his shoulder and drill his rib cage or knees.

The NFL is concerned here only with head, neck and spine injuries. Players have other thing to worry about as well, like not ending up with cracked ribs and a punctured lung or out for the year with an ACL.

Wthout even thinking about the implications in the tackle box where linemen, linebackers and runners routinely lock horns, which is not exempted from this rule, the evident intent is make the game more upright in space. If you're going to do that then players can't protect themselves from forcible stikes to parts of the body other than the head and neck.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes, they are trying to change the styles of play.

Let's take another look at that Finley clip a couple of post above.

Finley lowered his head to defend himself and initiated contact with his helmet. What would he be expected to do under this new rule? Stay eyes up, shoulders up, and trust that the defender will just wrap up and not drill him in the rib cage or take out his knees?

Conversely, if that defender is supposed to stay eyes up, shoulders up so as to not inadvertly strike with the helmet he has to trust that Finley will not lower his shoulder and drill his rib cage or knees.

The NFL is concerned here only with head, neck and spine injuries. Players have other thing to worry about as well, like not ending up with cracked ribs and s punctured lung or out for the year with an ACL.

Wthout even thinking about the implications in the tackle box where linemen, linebackers and runners routinely lock horns, which is not exempted from this rule, the evident intent is make the game more upright in space. If you're going to do that then players can't protect themselves from forcible stikes to parts of the body other than the head and neck.

Agreed and I covered the "other new injuries" this could create in another post as well. Guys now exposing their bodies to blows as well as tackling in awkward positions to avoid a penalty.

I think you and I agree that this is a mess and if not cleaned up, it isn't going to go away.

The NFL might as well require all helmets to be strapped to the back of the shoulder pads, so a player has no choice but to keep his head up at all times......great idea, what could go wrong?!

 

[HardRightEdge]

It is a mess and the intent is great, an effort to try and get rid of head hunting all together.

The intent here goes well beyond issues of headhunting.

They're out to protect players from injuring themselves by striking with their helmet, whether an offensive player or defensive, Rozier or Finley. These are not exactly isolated cases. As Packer fans we can recall Nick Collins struck a guy on the thigh with his helmet, ending his career. According that new one-line rule, that play should draw a flag on Collins:

See the 1:20 mark in this video:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Despite the intent of this rule, it is hard to see what behavior modification it would encourage to prevent that hit arising out of the natural course of play.

Some may remember the RB Jonathan Franklin, whose career ended in his 2013 rookie season with a neck injury. I can't find a clip of the fateful play, but I do recall he was bucking the line in short yardage with his head down. You're not supposed to do that anymore because you could hit somebody with your helmet and injure yourself.

So much of this new rule is defective in attempting to address a highly complex issue in a one line rule.

 

[HardRightEdge]

In a nutshell, this is what this is all about:

The owners accept, as a cost of doing business, paying $20,000 all-in for a players knee replacement at age 45 under the retiree medical plan.

What they want to avoid is paying $80,000 or more per year for an indeterminant number of years of nursing home care for a crippled or brain damaged player along with the ongoing expensive medical treatments that go along with that.

But beyond medical costs, there is the potential of liability and more law suits arising from head, neck and spinal cord injuries.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The intent here goes well beyond issues of headhunting.

They're out to protect players from injuring themselves by striking with their helmet, whether an offensive player or defensive, Rozier or Finley. These are not exactly isolated cases. As Packer fans we can recall, Nick Collins struck a guy on the thigh with his helmet, ending his career. According that new one-line rule, that play should draw a flag on Collins:

See the 1:20 mark in this video: https://www.packerforum.com/threads/2018-rule-changes-first-impressions.79938/

Some may remember the RB Jonathan Franklin, whose career ended in his 2013 rookie season with a neck injury. I can't find a clip of the fateful play, but I do recall he was bucking the line in short yardage with his head down. You're not supposed to do that anymore because you could hit somebody with your helmet and injure yourself.

So much of this new rule is defective in attempting to address a highly complex issue in a one line rule.

not sure what 1:20 Mark video I am suppose to watch, that link takes me to top of page and you have 2 videos posted, both with the crushing hits on Adams.

Those are the hits the league should be trying to crack down on and hard. Sadly, the Finley one was just 2 players, colliding in football movements at the wrong place and time, there wasn't intent to injure. Injuries are a part of the game, and there is really no way around them, without really gutting the game of how its been played.

While head injuries are not something to just ignore, this new rule feels like a poorly devised attempt by the owners to try and wash their hands clean of them, with no forward thinking or logic of the impracticality of how it will play out, something we have all seen now. Players are still going to suffer concussions and injuries when their heads hit the ground, or a bone crushing legal tackle snaps their heads in an awkward way. Go after the obvious ones, try to eliminate those and the game is better for it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

But beyond medical costs, there is the potential of liability and more law suits arising from head, neck and spinal cord injuries.

Yup and players like Sam Shileds, who from memory suffered most of his concussions when his helmet struck the ground, aren't going to just disappear with this new rule.

 

[HardRightEdge]

not sure what 1:20 Mark video I am suppose to watch

I copied the URL from the wrong window. Post#45 is fixed now. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I copied the URL from the wrong window. Post#48 is fixed now. Thanks for pointing that out.

which post? LOL Breath buddy, we will get this right.

I did find it in post #45

Yes, this is what you and I have been referring too. This silly new rule will not prevent head/neck injuries like the one Collins sustained. As a matter of fact, it may create situations like that. Did you notice Collins had his head up, not down. With the new rule, Players may try to keep their heads up while tackling, now this may protect the runner more, but what does it do to the guy that has his head and body snapped back because he didn't duck?