Sean's Helmet To Helmet hit...

[Coryea]

It's a crap call there's nothing he can do there, the penalty result was better than him catching it, they got it at the the 12 instead is the two, but there was absolutely nothing he could do

 

[deljzc]

Here's the problem: IT'S STILL A FOUL.

ANY helmet to helmet contact can be flagged, by rule. Head up or down doesn't matter anymore. The original rule, "crowning", covered lowering the head. The new rule don't care if you're head up, head to the side, shoulder pad or whatever. Contact to a receiver's head is flagged, and that's bullshit. There's no technique you can teach that will avoid that contact except for "let the reliever catch the ball, take two steps, then tackle".

And I'm sorry, but that ain't football. If dudes don't want to get hit they should take up golf.

What isn't part of football is "tuck and launch". Not for it's first 50 years of existence. Then we all grew up with it in the 1970's and 1980's when players realized their heads were so well protected they could turn them into weapons. We think this is normal, but it really isn't. There is no reason for it to be in the game.

Davis could have played the ball. He could have lead with his hands. He didn't. He is still of the mistaken mentality of "tuck and launch" and blow up the guy. Sorry, but that is going away. There is just too great a chance of helmet to helmet. It is almost unavoidable, therefore it IS risky to play that way.

Look, you can call it bad or good, doesn't matter. We can agree to disagree. Doesn't matter. The league IS trying to legislate out "tuck and launch" hits and we all know it.

I wish they would just come out and say that's what they want, but they hide behind this helmet to helmet bullshit.

 

[ark steel]

You hit the guy in the chest, head up, his head snaps forward, face mask hits the top of you helmet, penalty...

The hit by Davis will be called every time, even if unavoidable. They used to have some judgement, but that was ****** up worse than now.

 

[blitzburghv5]

I really don't care at this point because that hit saved the TD......they scored eventually but the hit separated the ball from the WR. That's 15 yards of infraction ill take every time if it saves a TD.

 

[SteelerSask2]

I don't like any of the "tuck and launch" tackles in the game. None of them.

You need to tackle head up, arms out and wrap people up. Period. That even goes for secondary players now trying to break up plays. Why not lead with your hands? Get your hands in their to dislodge the ball? Watch what you are hitting?

But there is still a very old-school mentality of "tuck and launch" that has to be penalized out of the game. It's happening no matter the "strike zone". Players need to adjust.

That's was not an attempt to tackle. That is Davis trying to separate the player from the ball. Any attempt to tackle would have meant conceding first and goal from the 2 or 3. We might have had a very different feeling about yesterday if he had.

 

[bigtwnvin]

It's a rule that needs to be tweaked. Davis was obviously turning away to avoid hitting him in the head.

After watching the replays ad nauseum from all the nifty angles I am of the impression Davis led the hit with his shoulder not his helmet. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Steel Vanguard]

What isn't part of football is "tuck and launch". Not for it's first 50 years of existence. Then we all grew up with it in the 1970's and 1980's when players realized their heads were so well protected they could turn them into weapons. We think this is normal, but it really isn't. There is no reason for it to be in the game.

Davis could have played the ball. He could have lead with his hands. He didn't. He is still of the mistaken mentality of "tuck and launch" and blow up the guy. Sorry, but that is going away. There is just too great a chance of helmet to helmet. It is almost unavoidable, therefore it IS risky to play that way.

Look, you can call it bad or good, doesn't matter. We can agree to disagree. Doesn't matter. The league IS trying to legislate out "tuck and launch" hits and we all know it.

I wish they would just come out and say that's what they want, but they hide behind this helmet to helmet bullshit.

You're still pushing "tuck and launch". A wrap tackle that results in helmet to helmet contact, or helmet to shoulder contact IS STILL A FOUL. So your ENTIRE POINT is moot. He could not "play the ball" without going THROUGH the receiver. That's Pass Interference and an auto 1st and goal from the 2. So that don't work either. Helmet to helmet saved 10 yards (personal foul brought them down to the 12).

This rule is broken. It does not work to make football better, or safer. It's just free yards for the offense.

 

[Steeltime]

Davis went helmet-to-helmet on a defenseless receiver. That is a fact. Look, I get that Davis had a tough angle to hit him anywhere else, but the fact that a player does not "mean" to commit the penalty just does not matter.

What I see from the highlight is that if Davis had played the ball instead of looking to obliterate the receiver, he has a damn good chance of knocking the pass away, making it 4th and 9.

 

[ark steel]

You hit the guy in the chest, head up, his head snaps forward, face mask hits the top of you helmet, penalty...

The hit by Davis will be called every time, even if unavoidable. They used to have some judgement, but that was ****** up worse than now.

 

[Steel Vanguard]

Davis went helmet-to-helmet on a defenseless receiver. That is a fact. Look, I get that Davis had a tough angle to hit him anywhere else, but the fact that a player does not "mean" to commit the penalty just does not matter.

What I see from the highlight is that if Davis had played the ball instead of looking to obliterate the receiver, he has a damn good chance of knocking the pass away, making it 4th and 9.

You know what? **** this. Truth time: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "DEFENSELESS" RECEIVER.

That entire concept is bogus. Receivers wear pads like everyone else. If you don't want to get hit, WTF are you doing in football? Running backs aren't "defenseless". Blindsided DBs who get blocked into next week aren't "defenseless". But somehow wearing an 80 number magically makes you a delicate snow flake who can't be touched?

**** that. Deacon Jones, Concrete Charlie, Art Donovan, Dick Butkus. All the old greats hate(d) these bullshit rules. And they're right.

 

[Steeltime]

You know what? **** this. Truth time: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "DEFENSELESS" RECEIVER.

That may be your opinion, but the NFL rulemakers differ.

And guess whose opinion counts on this subject.

 

[Steel Vanguard]

That may be your opinion, but the NFL rulemakers differ.

And guess whose opinion counts on this subject.

Just because they have to power to ruin the sport, does not make them right.

 

[Stryker]

It was helmet to helmet. No question. Sucks, but it was called right.

Want to know why Shazier didn't get the benefit of being a defenseless receiver? 1. the ball was tipped, he could get murdered in that situation. 2. He's not a *****.

 

[Steeltime]

Just because they have to power to ruin the sport, does not make them right.

Look, I am not arguing the merits of the rule, I'm just pointing out that the rules apply, and the hit clearly violated the rule. There really is no genuine dispute about this in my opinion.

 

[Steel Vanguard]

Look, I am not arguing the merits of the rule, I'm just pointing out that the rules apply, and the hit clearly violated the rule. There really is no genuine dispute about this in my opinion.

From my OP in this thread:

This rule needs to be rewritten to exclude incidental contact with the helmet. If I'm wrong, then please explain what technique would resolve this issue. Mind you, the man is defending the GOAL LINE and has to make a move split second.

I never said the call was bad. I said the rule was bad. This discussion is not about "should this have been called". This discussion is about "is this rule bullshit".

And the answer is "yes", this rule is bullshit.