Why should intent matter for helmet to helmet hits?

[row_33]

1 minute ago, T master said:

I watched both hits & the only thing different that i could see was when Burfict was on his way in he lowered his helmet & used the crown to hit the other player which looked pretty intentional to me !

 

On the hit with Josh it looked as if the guy was trying to hit him with his shoulder & Josh lowered his head for the impact & also due to the angle that the first tackler was pushing him their heads collided i was surprised to see the other player walk away it was a pretty hard hit .

 

I'm not happy with the out come & think the Pats player could be fined for it but the Burfict hit looks as if he was head hunting & the other i can't say that, that was his intention JMO !! 

Burfict was in full stride and streamlined the ball carrier

 

that streamline effect is the usual grounds for dismissal and suspension 

 

 

[Freddie's Dead]

It shouldn't.  Dude went up JA's dome, should have been ejected.  He had other choices for tackling JA and chose the one that would do the most damage.

[GaryPinC]

Jones was going for a high hit against Allen, in the midst of being tackled, a semi-defenseless runner.  His body posture, upwards drive, and lack of attempt to wrap Josh give it away.  If Jones was one-on-one with Allen does he go for the high hit or tackle low?   If Allen is not in the midst of being tackled he could have handled Jones' hit much differently.

 

Jones decided to deliver a high shot in the midst of a tackle, make it targeting and a cheap shot.  

 

Did he mean to go helmet to helmet?     Who cares, he chose to attempt the hit and executed a very dangerous helmet to helmet hit.  If Josh wasn't concussed by that hit, the tackler took his feet out from under him and the resultant, uncontrolled head slam on the ground did it.

 

Hopefully Allen isn't out long but I fully expect a month if not more.  Those were two violent, successive blows to the head he took on that play.

 

If the NFL truly cares about reducing concussions, they would come down hard on Jones for doing this.  If you want to attempt a hit like that when an opponents ability to react is compromised, it better be strictly legal otherwise it's a stiff punishment.

[CountDorkula]

2 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

I watched Allen get hit by Jones live. It was brutal.  I watched a replay of the Burfict hit.  It was brutal. Outcomes weren't that different.  I am not a mind reader so I don't know either of their intents. And I don't care about.  

I think there is a reasonable analogy to a driver rear ending the car in front of them.  In all places I am aware of if I hit the car in front of me, it is my fault for following too closely. Always.  I am guessing in 99.9% of cars rear ending other cars it is a result of carelessness, not one driver purposely crashing into another driver.  As a driver I am expected to know how to drive and to not be careless. When an accident happens and it is my fault, than I am liable for the damages and subject to fines for following to closely.   No one would want to hear from me "but I did not intend to hit the other car'.   
 

In the Allen-Jones case, the hit was 100% Jones' fault, intent or not, and he should be held personally liable for it with an ejection, a fine and automatic suspension. 

If Jones or Burfict are actually proven to have intended to harm the person they targeted that is an actual crime called the police should become involved. And arrests should be made. 
I am a long time fan of the NFL.  I like hard hitting. I hate seeing anyone get hurt.  But most injuries are part of the game.  What Jones did this week is not part of the game. It was either an intentional cheap shot, or an avoidable accident brought on by careless and reckless play.  Jones should be held to account for either reason. 
 

 

Why.

I will give you two examples just from this past week.

 

Watch the Burfict hit on Jack Doyle.

Watch the Jones hit on Allen.

 

One is clear intent to injure, one is a collision that happens 10-20 times per game.

 

it sucks Allen got hurt, but if that was Poyer or Hyde that hit Brady like that there would be zero bi**** here and we would be saying the same thing Pats fans are saying about intent. 

4 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

Jones was going for a high hit against Allen, in the midst of being tackled, a semi-defenseless runner.  His body posture, upwards drive, and lack of attempt to wrap Josh give it away.  If Jones was one-on-one with Allen does he go for the high hit or tackle low?   If Allen is not in the midst of being tackled he could have handled Jones' hit much differently.

 

Jones decided to deliver a high shot in the midst of a tackle, make it targeting and a cheap shot.  

 

Did he mean to go helmet to helmet?     Who cares, he chose to attempt the hit and executed a very dangerous helmet to helmet hit.  If Josh wasn't concussed by that hit, the tackler took his feet out from under him and the resultant, uncontrolled head slam on the ground did it.

 

Hopefully Allen isn't out long but I fully expect a month if not more.  Those were two violent, successive blows to the head he took on that play.

 

If the NFL truly cares about reducing concussions, they would come down hard on Jones for doing this.  If you want to attempt a hit like that when an opponents ability to react is compromised, it better be strictly legal otherwise it's a stiff punishment.

 

If Poyer hits Brady like that, do you feel the same?

 

Defenders are taught that if you get a free shot on a QB you 100% take it. The Bills are no different.

 

Josh needs to learn how to slide of just fall forward. Always trying to do too much.

[GaryPinC]

6 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

 

Why.

I will give you two examples just from this past week.

 

Watch the Burfict hit on Jack Doyle.

Watch the Jones hit on Allen.

 

One is clear intent to injure, one is a collision that happens 10-20 times per game.

 

it sucks Allen got hurt, but if that was Poyer or Hyde that hit Brady like that there would be zero bi**** here and we would be saying the same thing Pats fans are saying about intent. 

 

If Poyer hits Brady like that, do you feel the same?

 

Defenders are taught that if you get a free shot on a QB you 100% take it. The Bills are no different.

 

Josh needs to learn how to slide of just fall forward. Always trying to do too much.

Absolutely.  Not a fan of DB's taking that shot but at the same time it's football.  Do it strictly legal or be punished.  Josh needs to avoid those situations also.

 

Burfict's intent was to use his helmet.  Jones' intent was to deliver a high shot and he did it with his helmet.  End result is the same, vicious concussion inducing hits.  Not saying both should be punished equally but both need to be significant.  Jones at a minimum should be fined and I'd like to see at least a one game suspension

[bmur66]

33 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

 

 

 

Defenders are taught that if you get a free shot on a QB you 100% take it. The Bills are no different.

 

 

I don't think so. That is frowned upon and penalties are harsh. Barkley was wrapped up and a second defender was in position to lay a vicious hit on him, probably sending him to the locker room with Josh. He backed off like he was coached to do.

Edited October 1, 2019 by bmur66

[Bangarang]

Don’t like the hit but Allen needs to be smarter when he runs. 

[Mrbojanglezs]

its less about intent and more about the Pats. The Pats are a marquee team for the NFL, the bills are not. Josh Allen is not a marquee player for the NFL so he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.

[row_33]

1 hour ago, CountDorkula said:

 

 

Defenders are taught that if you get a free shot on a QB you 100% take it.

 

DBs wake up every morning praying to deliver a hit like this on a foolish QB or skill player who won't protect himself

 

the O-line wants to get up to full speed downfield and totally lay out a DB just the same

 

 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

I watched Allen get hit by Jones live. It was brutal.  I watched a replay of the Burfict hit.  It was brutal. Outcomes weren't that different.  I am not a mind reader so I don't know either of their intents. And I don't care about.  

I think there is a reasonable analogy to a driver rear ending the car in front of them.  In all places I am aware of if I hit the car in front of me, it is my fault for following too closely. Always.  I am guessing in 99.9% of cars rear ending other cars it is a result of carelessness, not one driver purposely crashing into another driver.  As a driver I am expected to know how to drive and to not be careless. When an accident happens and it is my fault, than I am liable for the damages and subject to fines for following to closely.   No one would want to hear from me "but I did not intend to hit the other car'.   
 

In the Allen-Jones case, the hit was 100% Jones' fault, intent or not, and he should be held personally liable for it with an ejection, a fine and automatic suspension. 

If Jones or Burfict are actually proven to have intended to harm the person they targeted that is an actual crime called the police should become involved. And arrests should be made. 
I am a long time fan of the NFL.  I like hard hitting. I hate seeing anyone get hurt.  But most injuries are part of the game.  What Jones did this week is not part of the game. It was either an intentional cheap shot, or an avoidable accident brought on by careless and reckless play.  Jones should be held to account for either reason. 
 

I don't know about arresting people, but generally I agree.   If you're going to have rules to stop people from getting seriously injured, then the rules should be tough enough to cause people to be punished for violating the rules.   In the case of head to head hits, I think it's simple.   Head to head hit is a personal foul.   The guy who commits the foul is suspended from further play in the game until the guy who was hit in the head is cleared to return to the field.   That's fair, because the decision about whether he can return to the field is made by the trainers and doctors, not the coaches and players.  The hitter is suspended from game to game so long as the victim is in the concussion protocol.   End of story.   

 

Institute that rule and and head to head hits will disappear.  THAT would be getting serious about head to head hits.  

[row_33]

15 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I don't know about arresting people, but generally I agree.   If you're going to have rules to stop people from getting seriously injured, then the rules should be tough enough to cause people to be punished for violating the rules.   In the case of head to head hits, I think it's simple.   Head to head hit is a personal foul.   The guy who commits the foul is suspended from further play in the game until the guy who was hit in the head is cleared to return to the field.   That's fair, because the decision about whether he can return to the field is made by the trainers and doctors, not the coaches and players.  The hitter is suspended from game to game so long as the victim is in the concussion protocol.   End of story.   

 

Institute that rule and and head to head hits will disappear.  THAT would be getting serious about head to head hits.  

 

head to head hits occur on almost every play in the NFL

 

you hear that click of helmets almost every play in the NFL involving the takedown of a player, there's helmet collision on plays going out of bounds

 

it's inherent in the game

 

a fan getting super-sensitive about his team sees all kinds of things that the NFL takes for granted, the same as an NBA fan is convinced EVERY shot his players should be and-one or EVERY drive by an opponent is traveling

 

there is a clear problem in the game, for which Burfict provided a textbook example. that must be removed

 

 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by row_33

[stevewin]

3 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

I watched Allen get hit by Jones live. It was brutal.  I watched a replay of the Burfict hit.  It was brutal. Outcomes weren't that different.  I am not a mind reader so I don't know either of their intents. And I don't care about.  

I think there is a reasonable analogy to a driver rear ending the car in front of them.  In all places I am aware of if I hit the car in front of me, it is my fault for following too closely. Always.  I am guessing in 99.9% of cars rear ending other cars it is a result of carelessness, not one driver purposely crashing into another driver.  As a driver I am expected to know how to drive and to not be careless. When an accident happens and it is my fault, than I am liable for the damages and subject to fines for following to closely.   No one would want to hear from me "but I did not intend to hit the other car'.   
 

 

But to use the logic of some - it was the fault of the car you rear-ended because it was on the road

[skibum]

I think there is almost never an intent by a defender to hit a guy in the head (with the possible exception of a guy like Burfict). 

 

The problem is the defender choosing to follow through with a hit that has a good chance of landing on the head. That's a reckless play, and it looked to me like that's what happened to Allen. Jones was going for an aggressive legal tackle, but he didn't really have the time and space to make it a clean hit. So it was a reckless decision, even if the intent was not to go for the head. 

[Boatdrinks]

The NFL isn’t really serious about protecting all QB’s or even all players, for that matter. They certainly are t going to start with Josh Allen. It’s too bad because it will take out a big part of his game, but that’s how it is. It’s another reason why the Pats never get called for offensive holding. As we saw Sunday, a holding call gives free reign for defenders to take a shot at the QB without consequence on the field. 

[Shaw66]

41 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

head to head hits occur on almost every play in the NFL

 

you hear that click of helmets almost every play in the NFL involving the takedown of a player, there's helmet collision on plays going out of bounds

 

it's inherent in the game

 

a fan getting super-sensitive about his team sees all kinds of things that the NFL takes for granted, the same as an NBA fan is convinced EVERY shot his players should be and-one or EVERY drive by an opponent is traveling

 

there is a clear problem in the game, for which Burfict provided a textbook example. that must be removed

 

 

 

 

But players are not required to leave the field on every play.   What I'm saying is every time a player goes down with a hit to the head, play is stopped and the trainers come out to deal with him, the play should be reviewed, whether a penalty was called or not.   If on review it's determined that the tackler hit shoulder or helmet to head and did so without regard to the health of the guy who got hit, a personal foul should be called and the guy who made the hit should be suspended from NFL play until the guy who got hit is cleared to return to the field.   If it's two plays, fine, the hitter is out for two plays.   If it's the rest of the game, fine.   If it's three weeks, fine.   You hit someone in the head in a way that is a violation of the rules, you sit as long as the guy you hit sits.  

[Shaw66]

16 minutes ago, skibum said:

I think there is almost never an intent by a defender to hit a guy in the head (with the possible exception of a guy like Burfict). 

 

The problem is the defender choosing to follow through with a hit that has a good chance of landing on the head. That's a reckless play, and it looked to me like that's what happened to Allen. Jones was going for an aggressive legal tackle, but he didn't really have the time and space to make it a clean hit. So it was a reckless decision, even if the intent was not to go for the head. 

That's exactly right.  They should not be allowed to make plays without reasonably protecting the defenseless player.   Jones was reckless, and that recklessness shouldn't go unpunished. 

 

The point is that they are trying, or should be trying, to eliminate all head injuries.   The way to that is to punish every player who causes a serious head injury either intentionally or because he wasn't being careful to protect the defenseless player.   

 

Everyone, including the players, scream when a new player safety rule comes in.   But within two years of the new rule being instituted, the problem is pretty much solved.   There are probably 90% fewer hits on defenseless receivers than there were ten years ago.   QBs aren't getting hit below the knees any more.   They aren't getting hit in the head any more.  The players adjust to the rules, even if they don't like it. 

 

The problem with the head injuries is that they are so severe and have such long term consequences, it isn't enough deterrent to have a 15-yard penalty.  Automatic game and multi-game suspension will stop all but the accidental head hits.  

[Jon in Pasadena]

4 hours ago, Gray Beard said:

How does an offense retaliate?  Defense has the hitters, offense has the hittees.

 

 

4 hours ago, The Jokeman said:

Do what the Patriots do, run pick plays. 

 

Or.... hire Hines Ward away from the Jets to be our "Offensive Quality Control" coach ....?

[row_33]

Edited October 1, 2019 by row_33

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Bill Belichick SAID 

 

this is how we (Putz)  teach our  players to hit / tackle 

 

 

Edited October 1, 2019 by SlimShady'sGhost

[VW82]

The helmet to helmet part of it was flagged for unnecessary roughness. I'm not sure what else you expect the league to do unless you're advocating for completely removing hitting from the game. I have a feeling if it was Hide and Poyer hitting Lamar Jackson we'd be arguing the other side of it.

 

Josh wasn't defenseless. His forward progress had not been stopped. He was not on the ground or still in the air after catching a pass. He was not being held up by a tackler. It was a bang, bang play. I think some of you guys are being a little unrealistic about how fast the game moves and how little time there is for players to adjust. Josh got hit twice in the span of less than a second -- the first one changed his momentum and the angle of impact of the second hit. It really was bad luck more than anything. 

Edited October 1, 2019 by VW82