So the NFL passed that dumb helmet rule…

“Personal foul, the guy that lost his jersey on one of the best runs ever. 1st and 25.”


    1. How dare you sir.

  1. Ranjeeth says:

    Isn’t it easy to get paralyzed if you get hit hard enough with a straight arrows head??

  2. Hogdarnit says:

    Already have a spearing rule — why not just use that instead of muddling it up with another rule?

  3. David_Does_Dallas says:

    I think it is a good rule, and frankly i’m surprised it took so long for them to implement it.

    1. rex says:

      It’s a rule that’s a good idea but like they say “the road to hell is paved in good intentions.” All this rule will do is infuriate fans and have an uneccesarry impact on the game. The thing about penalties is they were penalties and cost you field position because well… you were “cheating.” AKA offsides, holding, facemask, PI. Those are all cheating. All of the sudden the refs are in charge of legislating safety but the thing about those penalties it none of them are “cheating” except in a very broad “Yes you are breaking a rule.” It’s an arbitrary rule though, not a competitive balance rule. How are you going to feel when this turns a first down into a 3rd and long for your team? How’s the team going to feel? Listen you wanna fine players or suspend them after the game for doing it. fine that’s outside the game, but you’re going to give the Refs the responsibility of legislating safety while trying not to let it decide games. It’s a no win situation. It’s a bad idea.

  4. Thorin says:

    Well, the tackle box already comes up on every play (illegal blocks reference it, intentional grounding references it, really something every play), so I’m not so worried about another rule referencing it. And since Earl cuts inside the tackle in the backfield and lowers his helmet at the line of scrimmage (or at least not more than 3 yards past it), he’s pretty clearly in it.

    It’s like the refrain that every hard Brian Dawkins hit on a “defenseless receiver” would have been a penalty last year. The defenseless receiver rule is only a penalty if you hit him in the head. I remember B-Dawk aiming for the body like a missile more often than not, that’s still fine too.

    Actually, with this crown-of-helmet rule, that old B-Dawk comments will finally be true, because he used to lead with his head at the ball. I’m not sure what that’s going to do to tackling now, but I think that’s a bigger worry than RBs getting through the line.

    1. If you look at where the LT is at the snap, the hit occurs way outside of that. I think that’s waht’s referred to as the tackle box, not where the tackle runs to. But again… here we are again… confused about another rule, and it was only implemented a few hours ago.

      1. Bob says:

        Surely just after a rule is created and everyone is still figuring it out is the time when confusion about a rule is most likely to occur?

        1. Thorin says:

          But there’s nothing new about the “tackle box.” It’s a well defined area referenced by a lot if other rules.

  5. Thorin says:

    Doesn’t that rule only apply outside the tackle box?

    1. See… Now there’s a fantastic point! Where is Earl Campbell when he hits the defender? Is he outside the tackle box, or not? It kind of looks like he is, but it’s close. So now we’re adding layers of debate on top of this thing. Another judgment call with layers of ambiguity… exactly what the league needs more of.

      1. RogerPodacter says:

        didnt they change the ruling on the ‘force out of bounds’ for receptions, just so that they could remove the factor of referee judgement?
        it seems like they are just trying to get the refs to make MORE judgement calls now…

%d bloggers like this: