Helmet To Helmet Hits

[89Hen]

Easy.

1. The offensive player is not defenseless.
2. The intent of meeting him head on is to stop him, not to hurt him.

No penalty (the large thing you seem to keep missing) therefore no fine or suspension. Next.

Right Sally We are going to start determining intent in the split seconds before a call is made.

Next girly-boy cry baby pissy pants..

Once again.

[93henfan]

89, how many times do I have to tell you not to argue with people with brain damage?

[Wedgebuster]

Don't worry girlies, you are likely to get your way, and you will probably love the result.

[89Hen]

Don't worry girlies, you are likely to get your way, and you will probably love the result.

If it means players like Desean Jackson and Todd Heap don't miss multiple games with concussions from ILLEGAL hits (one more time in case you missed it), yes, I will love the result.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Did you know that miners were more susceptible to the earth caving in on them? Movers are more susceptible to back injuries?

Did you know mines (most) and moving companies do things to limit the chances of this happening? Once again... GMAFB tough guy.

No shit girlfriend. They try to make the equipment better, they work on the technique, all the stuff to mitigate the damage. The NFL can work on all that as they have but to try and change the game fundamentally to give the upper hand to the offense is what the herd wants because it's what they've been told needs to be done.

You also seem to be misguided young lady in that you think I'm saying that dirty play should be allowed. That's not what I'm saying and it's the last time I'm gonna tell ya that. I'm saying that trying to make the normal incidental contact of helmets a suspendable act is complete fucking horseshit.

You're one of the soft people that wants to go along and say it's fine then that's dandy. We all have to be as safe as possible right sweet pea? It doesn't matter the cost to the way the game is played or the fact that FB has been a weekly dose of contained violence.

You gals want it watered down then it's gonna be watered down. It used to matter to me but not so much anymore so have at it.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Don't worry girlies, you are likely to get your way, and you will probably love the result.

If it means players like Desean Jackson and Todd Heap don't miss multiple games with concussions from ILLEGAL hits (one more time in case you missed it), yes, I will love the result.

If the hits are illegal then the perpetrator needs to miss games too but I'd have to see the hits. Would those hits have been illegal 10 yrs. ago and they were definitely trying to cause injury or is it illegal now due to the fact that the game is being turned into a game for pussies to view?

I honestly don't know cuz I didn't see the hits. I've only been going off the video from this thread that was the video put up as an illegal hit. Are you saying that the hit in that video on this thread is an illegal hit?

[Wedgebuster]

If it means players like Desean Jackson and Todd Heap don't miss multiple games with concussions from ILLEGAL hits (one more time in case you missed it), yes, I will love the result.

If the hits are illegal then the perpetrator needs to miss games too but I'd have to see the hits. Would those hits have been illegal 10 yrs. ago and they were definitely trying to cause injury or is it illegal now due to the fact that the game is being turned into a game for pussies to view?

I honestly don't know cuz I didn't see the hits. I've only been going off the video from this thread that was the video put up as an illegal hit. Are you saying that the hit in that video on this thread is an illegal hit?

Urs, ten years ago those hits would have made the weekly highlights show.

[89Hen]

to try and change the game fundamentally to give the upper hand to the offense...

trying to make the normal incidental contact of helmets a suspendable act is complete fucking horseshit.

I'm certainly not saying either of these things. If the change does give the upper hand to the offense, that is a side-effect of the change, not the desired result. Who said anything about normal, incidental contact of helmets?

[89Hen]

If the hits are illegal then the perpetrator needs to miss games too but I'd have to see the hits. Would those hits have been illegal 10 yrs. ago and they were definitely trying to cause injury or is it illegal now due to the fact that the game is being turned into a game for pussies to view?

I honestly don't know cuz I didn't see the hits. I've only been going off the video from this thread that was the video put up as an illegal hit. Are you saying that the hit in that video on this thread is an illegal hit?

By the rules, it was an illegal hit, but I'm not sure what the rules 10 years ago have to do with anything. 50 years ago they didn't wear helmets. Speaking of that, did everyone see that's Ditka's idea to solve these hits... stop wearing helmets.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

If the hits are illegal then the perpetrator needs to miss games too but I'd have to see the hits. Would those hits have been illegal 10 yrs. ago and they were definitely trying to cause injury or is it illegal now due to the fact that the game is being turned into a game for pussies to view?

I honestly don't know cuz I didn't see the hits. I've only been going off the video from this thread that was the video put up as an illegal hit. Are you saying that the hit in that video on this thread is an illegal hit?

By the rules, it was an illegal hit, but I'm not sure what the rules 10 years ago have to do with anything. 50 years ago they didn't wear helmets. Speaking of that, did everyone see that's Ditka's idea to solve these hits... stop wearing helmets.

On the Ditka thing yeah that's fine and BH86 has been saying that for a couple years as well.

The rules 10 yrs. ago didn't treat the offensive players like they should have so impunity from punishment. If the primary recipients of this penalty are the defensive players when the offensive players clearly do the same thing then the league is simply handing out welfare.

I want to be clear here. You are saying that the hit in the video that 93hen posted is illegal? If so how was it illegal?

[89Hen]

I want to be clear here. You are saying that the hit in the video that 93hen posted is illegal? If so how was it illegal?

By the rules, YES. You can disagree with the rule, but it has been illegal to hit with your helmet by the rules of NFL football since 1996 and it has been illegal to hit a defenseless receiver since last year.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

He was making a stop 89. He was broke down in the ordinary fashion to make that stop. The receiver was catching a ball and trying to make yardage while the defender was doing his job and trying to stop him. He did not try and use his helmet in any other fashion than the fact that it was attached to his head and his head was attached to his shoulder area which was striking the receivers shoulder area. It was not at the head, it was on the fucking shoulder pad dude.

That picture shows that he was not going for the helmet area. That's what this thread is about and the point I'm making.

That is a legitimate fucking tackle although he doesn't have his arms out to wrap up.

You really are a pussified mafucker hen. I don't know how it happened but it surely did.

Here's a picture of one of those ruffian RB's clearly leading with his helmet to attack a defenseless LB or two. If it works both ways great but it sure as hell doesn't.

[BlueHen86]

It should work both ways. I don't care about the penalty, to me it's not a yardage issue, it's a safety issue.

If a guy initiates helmet to helmet contact, make him sit out the next play. You'll still have some incidental helmet to helmet hits, but some reckless players may clean up their act.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

It should work both ways. I don't care about the penalty, to me it's not a yardage issue, it's a safety issue.

If a guy initiates helmet to helmet contact, make him sit out the next play. You'll still have some incidental helmet to helmet hits, but some reckless players may clean up their act.

I can go with that. It won't ever be done that way but if it's done on both sides which can equally cause damage then I can buy into it. Thing is it's a natural movement to lower you head when making a tackle or getting ready for a collision so there would be a whole lot of sit outs in the coming years for what we now consider "football".

I also love the way the language is set up now to make it appear more victim like. A "defenseless receiver" was hit by a defender.

They used to just be called names like "Jerry Rice" or "Steve Largent" didn't they?

[Wedgebuster]

Oh! A defenseless player!!! Whaaaaaaaaaaaah, cry me a friggin river and eat my taint dander.



Fuckin jack wagons!

[Wedgebuster]

O thay! I juth wanted to be the wide receiver, and make touth downs!!!!

I shouldn't be thubject to violenth on the field!!!!

[BlueHen86]

Like it or not Wedge, changes are going to happen. There is a lot of research being done on concussions and football, and the momentum for player safety is growing. There are too many voices out there for the NFL to ignore it.

Some of the research isn't being done on the high impact violent hits, but on the low impact hits that occur on every play (i.e. lineman hitting lineman). Some programs have already made changes to their practices and have reduced the amount of time practicing with pads on.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Like it or not Wedge, changes are going to happen. There is a lot of research being done on concussions and football, and the momentum for player safety is growing. There are too many voices out there for the NFL to ignore it.

Some of the research isn't being done on the high impact violent hits, but on the low impact hits that occur on every play (i.e. lineman hitting lineman). Some programs have already made changes to their practices and have reduced the amount of time practicing with pads on.

I hadn't even brought that up but I was gonna a while back. The simple offensive & d linemen have shown brain "bruising" a little short of concussive status and that happens every single play. Why don't we just move on to that and change the game to flag football as was suggested.

The idea of limiting the time in pads seems seems like a good one to me. Changing the game as it's gonna change isn't gonna be nearly as fun to watch I would bet but again we can't have these high risk activities.

Whatever happens I guess. I've just never seen an instance where safer meant more fun or excitement.

We'll all be able to talk about the good ol' days when men played the game someday and tell the youngin's about it.

[BlueHen86]

Like it or not Wedge, changes are going to happen. There is a lot of research being done on concussions and football, and the momentum for player safety is growing. There are too many voices out there for the NFL to ignore it.

Some of the research isn't being done on the high impact violent hits, but on the low impact hits that occur on every play (i.e. lineman hitting lineman). Some programs have already made changes to their practices and have reduced the amount of time practicing with pads on.

I hadn't even brought that up but I was gonna a while back. The simple offensive & d linemen have shown brain "bruising" a little short of concussive status and that happens every single play. Why don't we just move on to that and change the game to flag football as was suggested.

The idea of limiting the time in pads seems seems like a good one to me. Changing the game as it's gonna change isn't gonna be nearly as fun to watch I would bet but again we can't have these high risk activities.

Whatever happens I guess. I've just never seen an instance where safer meant more fun or excitement.

We'll all be able to talk about the good ol' days when men played the game someday and tell the youngin's about it.

I don't think the changes will be that radical, too many people like the hitting. Less contact in practice can help and shouldn't hurt the game too much. All the talk about last weekend, there was really only 1 hit that needs to be eliminated (Merriman - Heap) IMHO.

[89Hen]

He was making a stop 89. He was broke down in the ordinary fashion to make that stop. The receiver was catching a ball and trying to make yardage while the defender was doing his job and trying to stop him. He did not try and use his helmet in any other fashion than the fact that it was attached to his head and his head was attached to his shoulder area which was striking the receivers shoulder area. It was not at the head, it was on the fucking shoulder pad dude.

That picture shows that he was not going for the helmet area. That's what this thread is about and the point I'm making.

That is a legitimate fucking tackle although he doesn't have his arms out to wrap up.

[UNI88]

Andy, do you remember the name of the video? I've had a number of the kids I coach lead with the crown of their helmets despite my warnings and a video that visually demonstrates the risks would be great.

UNI, I would suggest insisting that your players keep their heads up, and eyes open at all times when hitting. I used to think of the crosses of my facemask as the crosshairs of a scope, keeping the target in the middle of the crosshairs all the way to impact. Make 'em practice that way, make it a habit, and you will have no more strained necks and shoulders.

We stress hitting with your should pad and putting your facemask on the ball but I've got a couple of hard cases that just won't listen to me. One is a Harrison type of player that is looking to inflict pain and uses his helmet as a weapon. The crosshairs example might appeal to him. I think the other is afraid of the initial contact and thinks his helmet will help protect him despite all of my warnings about the risks of leading with the crown.

Andy, any help you can give will be appreciated. I don't want a kid to end up paralyzed.

As far as the arguments on here go:
- any player (offensive or defensive) that initiates contact with the crown of their helmet should be penalized and if necessary suspended. That is for the offending player's safety as much as it is for the other player.
- I tell the kids that I coach that I want them to inflict pain on the other team because I want the other players to be a little afraid any time they touch the ball. I do not want them to injure the other players and IMO headshots are malicious as well as being poor form. You should be tackling the body not trying to remove the head.
- as someone who played a little WR and took some nasty blind side shots (and started hearing footsteps as a result), I've never been a big fan of the "defenseless player" argument. It's the QB's job to not put the receiver in jeopardy. The DB/LB should not have to hold back and risk giving up a big gain because the QB threw a ball that put the receiver at risk from a big hit. As a DB in those situations I would aim for the kidney not the head.

[89Hen]

As a DB in those situations I would aim for the kidney not the head.

Problem solved. Mods, you can close this thread.

[GannonFan]

Again, this isn't hard to understand - people are using their helmets to hit other people. Whether they hit the opponents head or not, the helmet is being used as a weapon. And as helmets get more and more sophisticated and provide more protection, people have and are using the helmet more and more. You can't tell me that player making the hit in many of the big hits this weekend had their eyes up and saw what they were hitting - they weren't. They had their heads down and led with the helmet. It's been a long time since we've seen guys make tackles with their heads and eyes up - it just isn't done that way anymore and eventually, the league is going to have to get back to that. However it's done, something has to be done to stop people using the helmet as the primary and lead part of a tackle.

[clenz]

Mount Union, the best D3 school in the nation, NEVER practices in pads

[clenz]

Here is an article about a former Mt. Union player who coaches in Ohio, and it touches on the contact in practice aspect

http://fridaynightohio.com/news/massill ... ger-season" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;