NFL wants to eliminate "hip drop" tackles

[BaaadThingsMan]

5 minutes ago, julian said:

This is crazy.. I used to roll my eyes at people who warned of the slippery slope when previous rule changes occurred in the name of safety and I was wrong and they were correct.

 

 It’s a contact sport with large athletes playing, at some point the risk of injury must be accepted or just grow a set of balls and make the NFL a non contact league and get it over with.

 

 This slow drip turning the game of football into a different viewing product is painful.

So is Rugby but it's banned in that sport

[boyst]

1 minute ago, BaaadThingsMan said:

So is Rugby but it's banned in that sport

Rugby doesn't have the stoppage and interference with discretionary calls like football

 

Football is becoming as pussified as soccer. 

[peterpan]

To the supporters of this rule, how do you envision players tackling someone while in pursuit?  Either from behind or from the side/behind!?  There’s no other way to do it.   Diving at the ankles doesn’t work nor would be any safer I’d assume.

 

 

I was against the horse collar rule - I only remember one single injury from that kind of tackle - TO on the Eagles.   I still have no idea why is was outlawed.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2023 by peterpan

[MJS]

1 hour ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

This is for rugby but explains it well.

Great video. I think this could be easily implemented in football. The key is landing on the back of their legs because of your actions as a tackler. I agree that should be a foul.

 

I'm usually on the side of letting players play, but this is definitely a safety concern and should be treated like a horse collar tackle.

 

Defenders can make a conscious effort to ensure they land on the ground instead of their legs. Although, I could see some issues in making judgment calls in real time for officials.

Edited October 18, 2023 by MJS

[BaaadThingsMan]

1 minute ago, boyst said:

Rugby doesn't have the stoppage and interference with discretionary calls like football

 

Football is becoming as pussified as soccer. 

Yes, but they do have a rule that you can't tackle a player that way 

2 minutes ago, boyst said:

Rugby doesn't have the stoppage and interference with discretionary calls like football

 

Football is becoming as pussified as soccer. 

Soccer is football

[MJS]

1 minute ago, peterpan said:

To the supporters of this rule, how do you envision players tackling someone while in pursuit?  Either from behind or from the side/behind!?  There’s no other way to do it.   Diving at the ankles doesn’t work nor would be any safer I’d assume.

I disagree. You don't have to twist your weight into the back of their legs to make the tackle. In fact, that is not usually what you see in pursuit tackles. Defenders can ensure they don't launch their own weight into the back of the ball carrier's legs. Their weight can go to the ground instead.

[Jdragon2]

2 minutes ago, BaaadThingsMan said:

Yes, but they do have a rule that you can't tackle a player that way 

Soccer is football

 

Not gonna lie this had me dying. 

[Freddie's Dead]

As long as Troy Vincent is the NFL Director of Player Safety, you can't take any of this seriously. 

[julian]

12 minutes ago, BaaadThingsMan said:

So is Rugby but it's banned in that sport

That’s kinda my point.. Rugby is a totally different sport and the NFL by adopting these rule changes is becoming more rugby than football.

 

 Nothing against Rugby and I’m glad people have the option to watch it. I prefer football.

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

14 minutes ago, peterpan said:

To the supporters of this rule, how do you envision players tackling someone while in pursuit?  Either from behind or from the side/behind!?  There’s no other way to do it.   Diving at the ankles doesn’t work nor would be any safer I’d assume.

 

 

I was against the horse collar rule - I only remember one single injury from that kind of tackle - TO on the Eagles.   I still have no idea why is was outlawed.

 

 

 

Do people understand what a hip drop tackle is? There's plenty of ways to tackle a guy from behind without doing this

 

 

[Buffalo716]

As a former corner who had to tackle plenty of bigger guys... Whether it was Chest to chest

 

Or I angled to get his legs... Or I was chasing someone down across the field

 

This was like the last think you would think of..  Its definitely dangerous 

[Warcodered]

20 minutes ago, MJS said:

Great video. I think this could be easily implemented in football. The key is landing on the back of their legs because of your actions as a tackler. I agree that should be a foul.

 

I'm usually on the side of letting players play, but this is definitely a safety concern and should be treated like a horse collar tackle.

 

Defenders can make a conscious effort to ensure they land on the ground instead of their legs. Although, I could see some issues in making judgment calls in real time for officials.

Feels like this is what people are missing it's not just tackling and pulling them down from behind, it's the sweeping the legs/landing on the legs that's the issue, without that it should be fine.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Warcodered

[BillsFan2313]

They should just go to two hand touch

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

Or an example from a Bills game

 

https://x.com/BradleyGelber/status/1333128939049512968?s=20

 

Still think it's incredible that Josh wasn't injured on that play 

[Saxum]

1 hour ago, Allen2Diggs said:

The league needs to do a better job at maintaining their playing fields. Natural grass is the safest choice and a multibillion dollar league shouldn't cheap out on astroturf while claiming to promote player safety.

 

1 hour ago, BaaadThingsMan said:

Agreed. That should be priority one. 

 

Doesn't seem to be a priority for NFLPA.  If it was a priority NFLPA would be offering to contribute to it but this is the same NFLPA which objected to additional safety equipment for players.

 

Part of the problem is it is very difficult to maintain grass fields in the north which not coincidentally is where most of the Superbowl games are not played.

Teams which hold Superbowls get additional revenue.

 

If there is going to be concentrated effort to get all of the teams without grass fields the NFL and NFLPA are both are going to have to contribute.

[Warcodered]

2 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

Or an example from a Bills game

 

https://x.com/BradleyGelber/status/1333128939049512968?s=20

 

Still think it's incredible that Josh wasn't injured on that play 

 

Guy was wrapping around Josh's leg like an anaconda.

[BaaadThingsMan]

Just now, Limeaid said:

 

 

Doesn't seem to be a priority for NFLPA.  If it was a priority NFLPA would be offering to contribute to it but this is the same NFLPA which objected to additional safety equipment for players.

 

Part of the problem is it is very difficult to maintain grass fields in the north which not coincidentally is where most of the Superbowl games are not played.

Teams which hold Superbowls get additional revenue.

 

If there is going to be concentrated effort to get all of the teams without grass fields the NFL and NFLPA are both are going to have to contribute.

Where theres a will, theres a way.

 

Both sides should sit down for serious talks and find a solution. 

 

Looking at the numbers it's obvious that serious leg injuries are happening more on turf than natural grass.

 

So glad the Bills are going natural grass in the new field. 

[Chandler#81]

Geez! What are they gonna take away next? The Head Slap? Leg Whip? Throwing a guy?

This isn’t flag football , dammit!

[Saxum]

27 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

As long as Troy Vincent is the NFL Director of Player Safety, you can't take any of this seriously. 

 

Really? You doubt Troy Vincent to hit a rookie QB with a red shirt on?

[Big Turk]

How do they claim they are so concerned with player safety but still allow teams to play on garbage turf fields like the one at Tottenham's field?  Oh...that's right...because it's only an actual concern when it doesn't interfere with money.