THE REAL PROBLEM THE NFL IS FACING

It is NOT that players are bigger and faster. It is NOT that the helmet is a weapon. It is NOT that players are more vicious. They are ALL factors of course but they are NOT the underlying problem. If they were? We'd see hits like we saw this weekend on the sidelines, during running plays etc, yet we don't. We see them on passes over the middle.

The underlying problem is incompetent quarterbacking. 25 years ago when I was playing in college we had a term for when a quarterback threw a high ball across the middle to a receiver running a crossing pattern against a zone defense. It was called a "buddy fucker" pass. When a QB threw a ball like that the other nine guys looked at him in the huddle and said "What the fuck was THAT" and the receiver came back to the huddle and said "Thanks buddy." It was seen as a betrayal of a teammate and QB's who did it were mortified. Now in some ways any receiver dumb enough to run across the field against a zone deserves what he gets. But one of the QB's jobs was to protect even the stupid receiver.

You'll notice that the premier QB's don't have this happen to their receivers. The Patriots and Colts receivers, for example, don't get blown up this way. Why? Because Brady and Manning don't put them in that position. The game is now designed to drive the passing game so we see more throws than ever before. As much as I hate several of those rules, that isn't going to change. Yet the quality of quarterbacking just hasn't kept up. After the first 5-6 QB's these guys just don't read today's complex coverage defenses well enough to succeed AND protect receivers. So the game must be softened to account for this failing.

I hate it, but I don't think the NFL really has a choice.

Some QBs are leading WRs into these hits, even Brady and Peyton do it occasionally, but the problem is mostly in the way these guys are tackling these days. All of them try and loadup and get the blowup, what happens? They end up driving the helmet in time after time. The play with Desean, the corner who put the hit on Desean loads up and drives with the helmet, he actually got hurt himself on that play. Of the notable hits this season, the only play I can think of where the QB leads the WR into the hit is the Desean play, Harrison's hit on Cribbs was a run and he lead with the helmet, Meriweather's hit on Heap was all helmet, earlier in the season the hit on Gresham just dirty and helmet.

LA wrote:

Some QBs are leading WRs into these hits, even Brady and Peyton do it occasionally, but the problem is mostly in the way these guys are tackling these days. All of them try and loadup and get the blowup, what happens? They end up driving the helmet in time after time. The play with Desean, the corner who put the hit on Desean loads up and drives with the helmet, he actually got hurt himself on that play. Of the notable hits this season, the only play I can think of where the QB leads the WR into the hit is the Desean play, Harrison's hit on Cribbs was a run and he lead with the helmet, Meriweather's hit on Heap was all helmet, earlier in the season the hit on Gresham just dirty and helmet.

That hit on Gresham was fucking brutal.

I honestly think after seeing the play over and over, that the hit on Jackson was the least deliberate. The corner could see he was getting led right to him and his job is to keep him from catching the ball. Brutal as it was, it had nothing on Harrison who is historically a filthy dirty player.

My biggest issue with the new suspension rules is that now the refs have even more control. They prove week in and week out that they can't handle their jobs and they are ruining games. My opinion is that they need to review the play on the field and if it is ruled intentional then eject the guy and let the league review it during the week. Either way this rule WILL affect the outcome of games.

Can we agree the Meriwhether hit is unacceptable, the Harrison hit was marginal and the Desean hit was just the brutality of football?

Ziggy116 wrote:

LA wrote:

Some QBs are leading WRs into these hits, even Brady and Peyton do it occasionally, but the problem is mostly in the way these guys are tackling these days. All of them try and loadup and get the blowup, what happens? They end up driving the helmet in time after time. The play with Desean, the corner who put the hit on Desean loads up and drives with the helmet, he actually got hurt himself on that play. Of the notable hits this season, the only play I can think of where the QB leads the WR into the hit is the Desean play, Harrison's hit on Cribbs was a run and he lead with the helmet, Meriweather's hit on Heap was all helmet, earlier in the season the hit on Gresham just dirty and helmet.

That hit on Gresham was fucking brutal.

I honestly think after seeing the play over and over, that the hit on Jackson was the least deliberate. The corner could see he was getting led right to him and his job is to keep him from catching the ball. Brutal as it was, it had nothing on Harrison who is historically a filthy dirty player.

My biggest issue with the new suspension rules is that now the refs have even more control. They prove week in and week out that they can't handle their jobs and they are ruining games. My opinion is that they need to review the play on the field and if it is ruled intentional then eject the guy and let the league review it during the week. Either way this rule WILL affect the outcome of games.

I hear ya. My problem is I think determining intentionality is impossible.

They had a nice talk on this yesterday with Keyshawn, Chris Carter, Tom Jackson, Ditka and Boomer. I kind of agree with Tom Jackson that if you go over the middle of the field you have to pay the price. That's why only a select few can do it.

If they really want to stop this the best way would be to make extended crossing routes illegal. Make a rule that says that a receiver can run no more than five horizontal yards within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

If they really want to stop this the best way would be to make extended crossing routes illegal. Make a rule that says that a receiver can run no more than five horizontal yards within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Yeah but does anyone really want that? I think a harsher punishment for the player, like a suspension is what is best. Like those guys I mentioned before were talking about yesterday, a 25K fine isn't much for a man who makes 7 million a season. You need to penalize them games and hurt the team.

OU wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

If they really want to stop this the best way would be to make extended crossing routes illegal. Make a rule that says that a receiver can run no more than five horizontal yards within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Yeah but does anyone really want that? I think a harsher punishment for the player, like a suspension is what is best. Like those guys I mentioned before were talking about yesterday, a 25K fine isn't much for a man who makes 7 million a season. You need to penalize them games and hurt the team.

I sure don't want it. just saying it would deal with the issue. I think they have no choice but suspensions.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

OU wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

If they really want to stop this the best way would be to make extended crossing routes illegal. Make a rule that says that a receiver can run no more than five horizontal yards within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Yeah but does anyone really want that? I think a harsher punishment for the player, like a suspension is what is best. Like those guys I mentioned before were talking about yesterday, a 25K fine isn't much for a man who makes 7 million a season. You need to penalize them games and hurt the team.

I sure don't want it. just saying it would deal with the issue. I think they have no choice but suspensions.

I keep hearing people refer to it as a "human missile" kind of technique and I think that is a very good way to describe it. I think that should be banned with the penalty being a min of 1 game suspension. But often times I think it should be more then a 1 game suspension. They also talked about how defenders are less willing these days to use their arms in tackles. Both things that could help this problem.

OU wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

OU wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

If they really want to stop this the best way would be to make extended crossing routes illegal. Make a rule that says that a receiver can run no more than five horizontal yards within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Yeah but does anyone really want that? I think a harsher punishment for the player, like a suspension is what is best. Like those guys I mentioned before were talking about yesterday, a 25K fine isn't much for a man who makes 7 million a season. You need to penalize them games and hurt the team.

I sure don't want it. just saying it would deal with the issue. I think they have no choice but suspensions.

I keep hearing people refer to it as a "human missile" kind of technique and I think that is a very good way to describe it. I think that should be banned with the penalty being a min of 1 game suspension. But often times I think it should be more then a 1 game suspension. They also talked about how defenders are less willing these days to use their arms in tackles. Both things that could help this problem.

My view is there is already too much offense in the game. I WANT receivers scared to go over the middle. I WANT thundering hits. an interesting idea is a requirement to bring one's arms with the blow.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

OU wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

OU wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

If they really want to stop this the best way would be to make extended crossing routes illegal. Make a rule that says that a receiver can run no more than five horizontal yards within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage.

Yeah but does anyone really want that? I think a harsher punishment for the player, like a suspension is what is best. Like those guys I mentioned before were talking about yesterday, a 25K fine isn't much for a man who makes 7 million a season. You need to penalize them games and hurt the team.

I sure don't want it. just saying it would deal with the issue. I think they have no choice but suspensions.

I keep hearing people refer to it as a "human missile" kind of technique and I think that is a very good way to describe it. I think that should be banned with the penalty being a min of 1 game suspension. But often times I think it should be more then a 1 game suspension. They also talked about how defenders are less willing these days to use their arms in tackles. Both things that could help this problem.

My view is there is already too much offense in the game. I WANT receivers scared to go over the middle. I WANT thundering hits. an interesting idea is a requirement to bring one's arms with the blow.

I agree with that and that is pretty much what Tom Jackson was saying yesterday. WRs need to know that the defenders own the middle of that field and crossing into that territory is going to cost you. I just don't like the "human missile" thing when guys running full speed lead with the helmet. But as those guys showed yesterday, even a legal shoulder to shoulder tackle will cause some helmet to helmet action, that is just unavoidable.

Steve Young said the same thing marble did last night, but Trent Dilfer's response was a pretty convincing counter argument. The two, along with Matt Millen, had a fascinating debate last night that I watched twice. Epic stuff from Steve and Trent.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5703113

The looks are much more complicated now. Defense have a leg up on offenses right now. The way O-lines are looking is further evidence of this. Every Qb in the league has been eaten alive at various points this year.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

The looks are much more complicated now. Defense have a leg up on offenses right now. The way O-lines are looking is further evidence of this. Every Qb in the league has been eaten alive at various points this year.

+1

Marble - you've got a point on QBs there, but defenses have also changed in the past 25 years. You didn't see drop zone blitzes the way to you today, which leave the QB having to hit the checkdown guy a lot faster, and usually in a worse position.

On this topic, and interesting story here on the idea of changing the game by taking off the helmets:

http://www.slate.com/id/2266532/entry/0

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81b732df/article/anderson-on-flagrant-hits-no-new-rules-just-more-enforcement?module=HP_headlines


NFL backing down already, they now say they will just enforce the rules better. They want to stop guys from launching and they want more wrapping up.

Watching Inside the NFL, they David Feherty as a guest, and his suggestion was get rid of the helmets to force players to learn how to tackle right w/out leading with their heads

Pointing out that this isnt that big of an issue in Rugby...

Interesting point, who has good Rugby knowledge?

gomez1012 wrote:

Watching Inside the NFL, they David Feherty as a guest, and his suggestion was get rid of the helmets to force players to learn how to tackle right w/out leading with their heads

The only thing with that "proper" tackling is that you'll see a lot more defenders getting arm/shoulder injuries. Maybe the league cares less about those than the traumatic head-shots though...

gomez1012 wrote:

Watching Inside the NFL, they David Feherty as a guest, and his suggestion was get rid of the helmets to force players to learn how to tackle right w/out leading with their heads

Pointing out that this isnt that big of an issue in Rugby...

Interesting point, who has good Rugby knowledge?

get Freak in here

Tobe06 wrote:

The only thing with that "proper" tackling is that you'll see a lot more defenders getting arm/shoulder injuries. Maybe the league cares less about those than the traumatic head-shots though...

No question

They want to avoid concussions and neck injuries. Rugby athletes in put in pads and suited up in the NFL would be annihilated. The games are entirely different.

gomez1012 wrote:

Tobe06 wrote:

The only thing with that "proper" tackling is that you'll see a lot more defenders getting arm/shoulder injuries. Maybe the league cares less about those than the traumatic head-shots though...

No question

Sucks if you happen to be a 185lb. defensive back who has to risk ending or shortening his career every time he comes up to tackle some monster RB or TE.

I think the causes of these hits very, but the crue is suspending these guys. Just like Tony Dungy said on sundaynightfootball they are making millions they don't give a shit about a fine. It would punish not only the player but the coachs would be on these guys for doing it if it meant they would lose a key defender for their team.

Tobe06 wrote:

Marble - you've got a point on QBs there, but defenses have also changed in the past 25 years. You didn't see drop zone blitzes the way to you today, which leave the QB having to hit the checkdown guy a lot faster, and usually in a worse position.

On this topic, and interesting story here on the idea of changing the game by taking off the helmets:

http://www.slate.com/id/2266532/entry/0

Oh I agree defenses are more complex. My point was QB's haven't kept up. Taking off the helmet absolutely solves the problem...and risks destroying the sport. They will never do it.