Running back rule passed....

[Pete]

The pussification of the US continues. We are raising a nation of pussies

[RealityCheck]

The pussification of the US continues. We are raising a nation of pussies

They say you are what you eat.

[#34fan]

so you like this rule change? i say just cancel the season, tackling will be the next to go. the defenseless WR calls were out of control last year now this will be added.

 

you know the risks when you step on the field. you get compensated very VERY well. If we are going to play flag just cancel the whole thing.

 

(yes i understand the plight of some and I am being naive to some who didn't make any $$$ and are hurt for life, but it is what it is to me)

 

add some sort of medical coverage for all NFL'ers and that would suffice for me.

 

Watching ball-carriers try not to "hurt anyone" will be hard to stomach.

 

There should be a 4-6 game "grace period" before regular enforcement. -That, at least, gives teams who rely on the run a chance to get their act together.

Edited March 22, 2013 by #34fan

[boyst]

For those that are wondering RGoodell@NFL.com is his email address... share your thoughts with him... it's perfectly acceptable.

[HankBulloughMellencamp]

Goodell wasn't Commisioner back when Joe D was playing. And now, as the only Commish to do anything about player safety, you fault him for doing soemthing about player safety? And mock him in the process? Who cares what his motivation is at this point? He's doing soemthing none of those before him did--and all we see is how "it's ruining the game". Makes absolutely no sense. You want him to take no steps to impact safety, yet want him to pay lifetime benefits when players in a tough business get old and achey?

 

Goodell and the NFLPA set up a $620 million retirement fund for players from the 60's, 70s and 80s (players before that are almost all covered by Medicare--the best insurance in the world). The benefit is for the lifetime of the player and/or his beneficiary.

 

If the players have a beef--they can take it up with their union, can't they?

 

Anyway--here's what the toughest RB ever had to say about this nonsense: (USA Today)

 

"I'm going to be very honest with you: I didn't use my head," Brown said. "I used my forearm. And the palm of my hand. And my shoulders. And my shoulder pads. I wasn't putting my head into too much of anything. I don't think that sounds like a good idea to me. What is my guarantee that my head is going to be strong enough to hurt somebody else, and not hurt myself?"

 

I'm gonna go with Brown over Freddie on this for obvious reasons.

 

Roger is, of course, a lawyer by trade, and is only instituting all of these player-safety items to try and mitigate the very large risk of astronomical damage figures that are sure to be paid to the plaintiffs in the concussion-related litigation. Guys who suffered head injuries have been quickly ushered back into games with smelling salts and/or minimal precautions as recently as a year ago (see Colt McCoy, 2011). It's part of the macho culture, but it does not excuse how players were routinely cleared by team medical personnel shortly after being concussed. It was essentially the same macho culture Goodell ruled so iron-fistedly against in the Saints bounty debacle. So Goodell is a hypocrite on many fronts to me, and what I think means very little, but many players also happen to feel this way. On a weekly basis, for many many years, players who were knocked silly were basically asked what day of the week it is and "who are we playing?" before being allowed to stay in the game so as to heighten their chances of staying employed.

 

There is nothing pre-emptive going on safety-wise, it is a last-ditch effort to save face, and too late for guys like Mike Webster, Junior Seau and Dave Duerson. If you would like to praise Rog for doing something because Tagliabue and Pete did very little on this front, then have at it, but don't suggest that mocking the emperor's wardrobe is blasphemous. He finally kicked that cash into the aging veterans' pensions as part of the lockout settlement, and it was long overdue, so he is no hero in that regard either. I am quite sure the NFLPA lobbied hard for the $620 million; I highly doubt Rog offered it as an olive branch because it was the right thing to do.

 

"The real scandal isn’t that one team took things too far, because the overwhelming medical and scientific evidence tells us that the entire sport has taken things too far and has done so for decades." --- Jay Bookman in article NFL facing major test of credibility, ethics

 

I do agree that all players inherently know the risks of an NFL career from the get-go, and all have been more than willing participants. So I also see some of the hypocrisy in the 4,000+ plaintiffs joining in on the concussion lawsuits. But, like JoePa, the NFL looked the other way while business was quite good. And these nebulous new safety rules will do little to actually help preserve player safety, and they will be a detriment to the way the game is played and officiated. And I will still be watching. And I also agree, Jim Brown was a bad ass.

Edited March 22, 2013 by HankBulloughMellencamp

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Watching ball-carriers try not to "hurt anyone" will be hard to stomach.

 

There should be a 4-6 game "grace period" before regular enforcement. -That, at least, gives teams who rely on the run a chance to get their act together.

 

I think preseason would be sufficient.

 

As the competition committee members have said repeatedly, this is not a rule that will be overcalled. IMO, people will be surprised by how seldom this rule is enforced and the rule change will be pretty much a non issue.

 

Except for that segment of society that likes to B word about things.

[#34fan]

I see contact with the crown on some of these awesome runs.

 

Just get rid of the position entirely. No more guys coming out of the backfield, period. Use RB's as an extra blocker/reciever catching only in the flat and out of screens.

[Mr. WEO]

[/size]

 

Roger is, of course, a lawyer by trade, and is only instituting all of these player-safety items to try and mitigate the very large risk of astronomical damage figures that are sure to be paid to the plaintiffs in the concussion-related litigation. Guys who suffered head injuries have been quickly ushered back into games with smelling salts and/or minimal precautions as recently as a year ago (see Colt McCoy, 2011). It's part of the macho culture, but it does not excuse how players were routinely cleared by team medical personnel shortly after being concussed. It was essentially the same macho culture Goodell ruled so iron-fistedly against in the Saints bounty debacle. So Goodell is a hypocrite on many fronts to me, and what I think means very little, but many players also happen to feel this way. On a weekly basis, for many many years, players who were knocked silly were basically asked what day of the week it is and "who are we playing?" before being allowed to stay in the game so as to heighten their chances of staying employed.

 

There is nothing pre-emptive going on safety-wise, it is a last-ditch effort to save face, and too late for guys like Mike Webster, Junior Seau and Dave Duerson. If you would like to praise Rog for doing something because Tagliabue and Pete did very little on this front, then have at it, but don't suggest that mocking the emperor's wardrobe is blasphemous. He finally kicked that cash into the aging veterans' pensions as part of the lockout settlement, and it was long overdue, so he is no hero in that regard either. I am quite sure the NFLPA lobbied hard for the $620 million; I highly doubt Rog offered it as an olive branch because it was the right thing to do.

 

"The real scandal isn’t that one team took things too far, because the overwhelming medical and scientific evidence tells us that the entire sport has taken things too far and has done so for decades." --- Jay Bookman in article NFL facing major test of credibility, ethics

 

I do agree that all players inherently know the risks of an NFL career from the get-go, and all have been more than willing participants. So I also see some of the hypocrisy in the 4,000+ plaintiffs joining in on the concussion lawsuits. But, like JoePa, the NFL looked the other way while business was quite good. And these nebulous new safety rules will do little to actually help preserve player safety, and they will be a detriment to the way the game is played and officiated. And I will still be watching. And I also agree, Jim Brown was a bad ass.

 

Again, I don't understand your point here. You say "it was long overdue" and go on and on about how things were done "for decades". Yet efforts are now being made to change outcomes. And you have a problem with that....because it wasn't done decades ago? Because you simply don't like Goodell?

 

Would it be better for you if Goodell simply said "hey, I'm with the players on this issue. I, too, don't care about safety and have no interest in turning this game into flag football, or a game for "pussies". As far as bounties go, they are a well respected and time honored tradition in this league. I will not interfere with the proud heritage of the game and I therefore condone the players' penchant for placing money on the intentional injury of other players. God bless this man's game".

 

Of course Goodell is thinking about the legal exposure of the NFL on safety--he would be a moron not to, so why even bring that up? And it seems that you don't realize that "Goodell" doesn't do anything without the direct order or consent of the owners, for whom he works. They meet several times a year. They tell him what to do and how to run their business. Got a problem with the Commissioner? Go talk to his boss, Ralph Wilson.

[HankBulloughMellencamp]

Again, I don't understand your point here. You say "it was long overdue" and go on and on about how things were done "for decades". Yet efforts are now being made to change outcomes. And you have a problem with that....because it wasn't done decades ago? Because you simply don't like Goodell?

 

Would it be better for you if Goodell simply said "hey, I'm with the players on this issue. I, too, don't care about safety and have no interest in turning this game into flag football, or a game for "pussies". As far as bounties go, they are a well respected and time honored tradition in this league. I will not interfere with the proud heritage of the game and I therefore condone the players' penchant for placing money on the intentional injury of other players. God bless this man's game".

 

Of course Goodell is thinking about the legal exposure of the NFL on safety--he would be a moron not to, so why even bring that up? And it seems that you don't realize that "Goodell" doesn't do anything without the direct order or consent of the owners, for whom he works. They meet several times a year. They tell him what to do and how to run their business. Got a problem with the Commissioner? Go talk to his boss, Ralph Wilson.

 

OK there it is, I basically don't like Roger Goodell, he's a douchebag. Specifically, I have developed my disdain for him over time after seeing how he flexes his commish muscles with heavy-handed, hypocritical and meddlesome ways. He cares about extracting the almighty dollar at every turn, and/or protecting the shield's Fort Knox-esque stash far more than he cares about player safety.

 

I don't think he's making the game any better by fining guys the tuesday after each contest (who are often times not even penalized during the game). And to hear him try to sell this new RB rule as 'progress' is laughable to me, just like his 18-game season sales pitch was.

 

I understand that Rog is the frontman/bad guy for the owners, and I am sure they love how he has been trying to reduce their legal liabilities while also printing money on their behalf. I, however, always tend to side with the players, since they are the disposable pieces of the NFL machine. Time has shown that the game spits them up and chews them out at a far greater clip than the rest of society.

 

I certainly welcome the new protocols restricting hitting during the week, and how concussions are treated more carefully. But the way I see it, they have no choice but to take those steps now. The best takeaway for me is how concussions are now treated at the high school levels, which is sort of like the wild west.

[Roger Goodell]

For those that are wondering RGoodell@NFL.com is his email address... share your thoughts with him... it's perfectly acceptable.

 

Or feel free to do it right here. I try to be available to answer fans' questions as often as I can.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I understand that Rog is the frontman/bad guy for the owners, and I am sure they love how he has been trying to reduce their legal liabilities while also printing money on their behalf. I, however, always tend to side with the players, since they are the disposable pieces of the NFL machine. Time has shown that the game spits them up and chews them out at a far greater clip than the rest of society.

 

I certainly welcome the new protocols restricting hitting during the week, and how concussions are treated more carefully. But the way I see it, they have no choice but to take those steps now. The best takeaway for me is how concussions are now treated at the high school levels, which is sort of like the wild west.

 

Well now we're getting somewhere.

 

As to the bolded, don't you think that it's a bit ironic?

 

Do you not think that the players are benefitting from these rule changes?

[boyst]

Or feel free to do it right here. I try to be available to answer fans' questions as often as I can.

It would be awesome if Goodell would do that. I mean, I would not want him to weigh in on who we need to draft, or Ralph's Taurus, or anything like that... but it would be nice to have him stop in and post on a forum and say "Good win today for our team!"

[Roger Goodell]

It would be awesome if Goodell would do that. I mean, I would not want him to weigh in on who we need to draft, or Ralph's Taurus, or anything like that... but it would be nice to have him stop in and post on a forum and say "Good win today for our team!"

 

That's why I'm here. To provide my insight on leaguewide matters for the benefit of you the fans.

 

And I'm happy for all the teams when they win. Except for the Saints. I'm still kinda pissed at them.

[Mr. WEO]

Well now we're getting somewhere.

 

As to the bolded, don't you think that it's a bit ironic?

 

Do you not think that the players are benefitting from these rule changes?

 

You are correct. The players have consistently shown that they are not interested in any proposed effort to make the game safer. All we hear is the opposite--they loudly protest any rule change, yet they and their union have no proposal to improve safety, other than some goofy "independent physician on the sidelines" to examine guys after head shots, as though the "team doctor" (a guy in practice who is always going to look after his own skin anyway, not the team's, when evaluating a player) cannot be trusted, but some other dude saying "how many fingers? where are we? what day is it" is any better for the player.

 

The players are only interested in safety after they are retired or cut form the league. Then they are running to sign on to a class action suit ("hey, I have headaches too!"). They are the ones with zero credibility on this issue, not this Commisioner.

 

 

Hankbulloughencamp has already compromised his position by simply saying he doesn't like Goodell. Even this is an irrational position for Hank (or anyone) to take. For the fan, the main job for Goodell is to guarantee me free football on TV for the forseeable future. Why should fan care if he was "heavy handed" with the Saints--a huge collection of a$$holes, from coach to players (who were clearly involved in a scheme--to intentionally hurt other players!!)? Why should fans care about a few meaningless rules like this "head lowering" nothingness that just passed?

 

The new CBA promises players more money than they have ever seen before. There is a huge new retirement benfit (2/3 of a billion) for old timers. There is football 3 nights a week and all day sunday. There's the Red Zone and fantasy footbll has never been more popular. There is NO 18 GAME SCHEDULE on the horizon, nor will there ever be unless the NFLPA brings it up and agrees to it.

[NoSaint]

 

 

I think preseason would be sufficient.

 

As the competition committee members have said repeatedly, this is not a rule that will be overcalled. IMO, people will be surprised by how seldom this rule is enforced and the rule change will be pretty much a non issue.

 

Except for that segment of society that likes to B word about things.

 

agreed. and i think the nfl will be mindful, and refs instructed to only call the bad cases. this isnt going to be every time a back runs into a defender aggressively. itll be a very specific, and from my understanding generally very rare, type of hit. the kind that we tend to cringe when we see for good reason - not the ones that we tend to celebrate. that last part is a bit of a generalization but.... in general i think it to be the case.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

agreed. and i think the nfl will be mindful, and refs instructed to only call the bad cases. this isnt going to be every time a back runs into a defender aggressively. itll be a very specific, and from my understanding generally very rare, type of hit. the kind that we tend to cringe when we see for good reason - not the ones that we tend to celebrate. that last part is a bit of a generalization but.... in general i think it to be the case.

 

I have only one concern about the rule.

 

I'm not sure how the rule will be written yet but I would say that they should possibly consider have exemptions for goal line and short-yardage runs.

[HankBulloughMellencamp]

You are correct. The players have consistently shown that they are not interested in any proposed effort to make the game safer. All we hear is the opposite--they loudly protest any rule change, yet they and their union have no proposal to improve safety, other than some goofy "independent physician on the sidelines" to examine guys after head shots, as though the "team doctor" (a guy in practice who is always going to look after his own skin anyway, not the team's, when evaluating a player) cannot be trusted, but some other dude saying "how many fingers? where are we? what day is it" is any better for the player.

 

The players are only interested in safety after they are retired or cut form the league. Then they are running to sign on to a class action suit ("hey, I have headaches too!"). They are the ones with zero credibility on this issue, not this Commisioner.

 

 

Hankbulloughencamp has already compromised his position by simply saying he doesn't like Goodell. Even this is an irrational position for Hank (or anyone) to take. For the fan, the main job for Goodell is to guarantee me free football on TV for the forseeable future. Why should fan care if he was "heavy handed" with the Saints--a huge collection of a$$holes, from coach to players (who were clearly involved in a scheme--to intentionally hurt other players!!)? Why should fans care about a few meaningless rules like this "head lowering" nothingness that just passed?

 

The new CBA promises players more money than they have ever seen before. There is a huge new retirement benfit (2/3 of a billion) for old timers. There is football 3 nights a week and all day sunday. There's the Red Zone and fantasy footbll has never been more popular. There is NO 18 GAME SCHEDULE on the horizon, nor will there ever be unless the NFLPA brings it up and agrees to it.

 

 

SJBF, of course I can agree that the players will experience some benefit from real safety measures, but I don't believe the RB rule will be administered effectively. Nor do I believe Roger's "gotcha" fines or mandates that ensure players wear their knee and hips pads will keep any of them safer.

 

And as for you, WEO, who the hell are you to tell me my opinion is invalid because I admit I don't like Goodell? I gave you the reasons why, him being a hypocrite and all. You have offered nothing to the conversation at all, other than to pat Rog on the back and attempt to poke holes in my argument by saying it is irrational. Oh, I forgot, you also said Fred Jackson should stop running his mouth, and speak up only when he stays healthy for a change (great point there), and then mentioned that I should take my issue up with Rog's boss, Ralph Wilson.

 

So your position is: players who exercise their right to sign up as plaintiffs are opportunists? Then why do most observers think it's not a matter of IF but HOW MUCH the NFL will have to shell out? Why shouldn't a player be concerned about his safety when he gets cut or retires from the game?

 

Is it your view that it's tough **** for Brian Westbrook if he can't remember what he had for breakfast these days at the ripe old age of 33? After all, he was guilty of being macho about things, and he didn't seem too concerned while he played? Plus, Rog has sent a few smoke signals up to make it look good, so the NFL is off the hook? He should just deal with the aftermath of years of negligent medical practices, despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary? I know, he's a whiny, washed up guy who just wants his cut on a frivolous lawsuit.

 

After seeing your work in another thread or two on TBD, and seeing the inane nonsense on your signature, I now realize that you are simply one of these trolling tools that jab away and take pleasure in pissing people off. You should pay your mom another 20-spot per month to cover your internet access and the degree to which you are most certainly a pain in her ass.

 

"Hurrah, there's football that I can watch for free 3 nights a week! Roger is the man! For he's a jolly good fellow!

Edited March 23, 2013 by HankBulloughMellencamp

[NoSaint]

 

 

I have only one concern about the rule.

 

I'm not sure how the rule will be written yet but I would say that they should possibly consider have exemptions for goal line and short-yardage runs.

 

It's not applicable everywhere. Not sure how its worded but essentially between the tackles is fine, it's open field that's illegal.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

It's not applicable everywhere. Not sure how its worded but essentially between the tackles is fine, it's open field that's illegal.

 

Damnit!!!

 

Why do you continue to harass me with true facts?

[Leelee Phoenix]

Just get rid of the position entirely. No more guys coming out of the backfield, period. Use RB's as an extra blocker/reciever catching only in the flat and out of screens.

The NFL will get there soon enough. Once all blocks below the waist are banned, and they will be, the run game is officially dead.