PDA

View Full Version : THIS is EXACTLY WHY GOD-ell Hates Harrison and the Steelers !



katmandu
12-22-2011, 11:51 AM
This Lawsuit is the exact reason WHY GOD-ell hates Harrison and the Steelers.

Yea, we all speculated and most of us saw a lawsuit like this coming, so here it is.....

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7379325/ex-rbs-jamal-lewis-dorsey-levens-sue-nfl-concussions (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7379325/ex-rbs-jamal-lewis-dorsey-levens-sue-nfl-concussions)


Good-bye to the NFL as we once knew it.

Hello NFFL. National FLAG Football League. :mad2:

steelreserve
12-22-2011, 12:13 PM
Hey, who would've guessed, not one of the guys with brain injuries was a QB or WR. Great job focusing on the real problem, Goodell.

What they really need to figure out is that 1) RBs and linemen are the ones who are at risk, and 2) No rule you could ever make is going to stop those players from getting hit in the head. If they really wanted to address this, they'd invest a few million dollars coming up with a helmet that can handle the force from the dozens of small and medium hits to the head those guys absorb every game. The big 20-megaton hits you probably can't do much about with a better helmet, but they're so infrequent that I have a hard time believing they're what's causing all these problems. But stop making rules. They don't do any good. As this proves.

steelreserve
12-22-2011, 12:15 PM
Also, I like what this guy in the comments had to say ... perfectly summed up one of the other main arguments against what Goodell and his Douche Crew are doing:


mdpinholster
I think they should sue the guy that held the gun to their head and made them play football professionally.

I am a military Veteran that also happens to work in healthcare now...there are some "on the job risks" involved with certain jobs.

It is called assumed and implied risk....

7willBheaven
12-22-2011, 12:19 PM
When you sign up to play the game of football injuries/concussions/etc are what you're agreeing to possible experience. Simple as that.

Hindes204
12-22-2011, 12:21 PM
Earlier this month, 12 former football players, including former receiver Joe Horn (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/1042/joe-horn), filed a lawsuit against the NFL about its concussion policies, saying there was widespread pregame use of an anti-inflammatory drug that could put someone with a head injury at increased risk.
In August, two separate lawsuits were filed against the league for its concussion-related policies:
A group of seven players, including former quarterback Jim McMahon (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/6406/jim-mcmahon), accused the league of training players to hit with their heads, failing to properly treat them for concussions and trying to conceal for decades any links between football and brain injuries.
Later in the month, another group of 18 former NFL players sued the league and helmet makers over head injuries suffered during their careers.
In July, 74 former players sued the NFL, claiming the league intentionally withheld knowledge of the damaging effects of concussions for 90 years.



Dont these guys know that they are entering a dangerous proffession? They should know the risks going into it, nobody forced them to sign the contract to play.

suitanim
12-22-2011, 01:04 PM
First off, Lewis' problem might stem from his cocaine use.

More importantly, this is the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit...EVERYONE knows that playing in the NFL is dangerous. Jumping off bridges is bad for you, too...if you don't want to get hurt, don't jump off bridges, and don't play in the NFL.

X-Terminator
12-22-2011, 01:07 PM
Well, this is the beginning of the end of football as we know it. I and many, many others have said that all of these rules were designed to ward off lawsuits. And lookee here...more lawsuits, and from players who played as recently as 2008 (Jamal Lewis). As fansince'76 so eloquently puts it, get ready for more "lawyerball" which will be nothing more than glorified 2-hand touch, because you know how reactionary Goodell is.

When you signed on the dotted line of an NFL contract, you agreed to all of the risks involved with playing, including concussions. Don't come back and sue the league for the choice that YOU made.

LLT
12-22-2011, 01:47 PM
Dont these guys know that they are entering a dangerous proffession? They should know the risks going into it, nobody forced them to sign the contract to play.

Hmmmm...What do you say Hindes...You and I should sue the Government for ..."Knowing as far back as 10000 BC....that wars can cause permanant injury."

The Duke
12-22-2011, 01:52 PM
yeah, bring more lawyers into the equation. That's gonna make it better :rolleyes:

steelerdude15
12-22-2011, 02:22 PM
When you signed on the dotted line of an NFL contract, you agreed to all of the risks involved with playing, including concussions. Don't come back and sue the league for the choice that YOU made.

Couldn't agree anymore.

steel striker
12-22-2011, 02:57 PM
We used to called this sport football but, now I don't know what to call it. Stick another nail in the coffin.

steelerdiva
12-22-2011, 03:16 PM
Hockey is looking and better and better to me (SMDH).

X-Terminator
12-22-2011, 03:37 PM
Hockey is looking and better and better to me (SMDH).

Pfft...the NHL is doing the same thing. Pretty soon there will be more violence in major league baseball.

Dino 6 Rings
12-22-2011, 03:43 PM
Its kind of funny that when I played in Highschool in the 1980s/90s we knew then that concussions were part of the game and that smacking our heads together really really really hard hurt a whole lot.

We also were taught to attack the ball, facemask on the ball is how we were taught to tackle. Facemask to the ball, head up, shoulders down. Drive through the hit, wrap up and bring down.

BlastFurnace
12-22-2011, 04:21 PM
Pfft...the NHL is doing the same thing. Pretty soon there will be more violence in major league baseball.

Atleast in Baseball, they can't throw a flag to nullify a base hit, double, triple, or homerun.

Craic
12-22-2011, 05:13 PM
Its kind of funny that when I played in Highschool in the 1980s/90s we knew then that concussions were part of the game and that smacking our heads together really really really hard hurt a whole lot.

We also were taught to attack the ball, facemask on the ball is how we were taught to tackle. Facemask to the ball, head up, shoulders down. Drive through the hit, wrap up and bring down.

And in a nutshell, that is everything I've argued here. If Harrison and other would do this, there would be no fines. Sometimes, I think players care too much about getting the harder hit, rather than a good tackle.

Also, regardless of whether there were risks or not, if a company knows of risks and misleads the employees, that's grounds for a lawsuit. It's one thing to assume risk, it's another to have hard evidence, and not pass it on. Furthermore, if they had the hard evidence and then continued to push or allow policies which deliberately put players in a position to incur more injury, such as playing with a concussion, then that could even amount to criminal negligence.

I've had summer jobs at a construction site. I knew the risks. That doesn't mean however, that if the construction company knew the way they were bracing walls wasn't right, and the brace snapped and the wall crushed me, It be up to me to deal with it because "I knew the risks."

Sorry, I don't buy that.

Once again, I have say that more padding, better helmets, better fitness routines = more series injuries, because players start trusting the equipment too much, and not their own brain. Who would be stupid enough to run flat out into a wall? So why do we then put pads on and (in the case of hockey) do that very thing, expecting the boards to give and the pads to take up the impact? Who would go out in their back yard, stand thirty feet away from each other, run full speed and then jump with the known probability that you're going to hit your head on someone else's? But put on pads and a helmet, and the whole thing changes.

I'm seriously starting to believe that the game should become padless and helmetless. Let 'im tackle all they want.

Hindes204
12-22-2011, 05:19 PM
And in a nutshell, that is everything I've argued here. If Harrison and other would do this, there would be no fines. Sometimes, I think players care too much about getting the harder hit, rather than a good tackle.

Its football...if you dont want to get run over by people like Harrison, then dont play...

Craic
12-22-2011, 05:29 PM
Its football...if you dont want to get run over by people like Harrison, then dont play...

That really makes no sense in context to my post.

Hindes204
12-22-2011, 05:40 PM
That really makes no sense in context to my post.

Thats weird, did you edit your post? When I looked the only thing there was the first sentence, the one I quoted.

Chidi29
12-22-2011, 06:47 PM
So Goodell's options are...?

Don't improve player safety and have him and the league get sued for millions upon millions

Or...

Improve player safety and get called Hitler by its fans?

Sounds like he is in a lose-lose.

fansince'76
12-22-2011, 07:07 PM
So Goodell's options are...?

Don't improve player safety and have him and the league get sued for millions upon millions

Or...

Improve player safety and get called Hitler by its fans?

Sounds like he is in a lose-lose.

I dunno, how about making real improvements instead of window dressing in the form of completely asinine and arbitrary fines and more protection for high-priced QBs and WRs which don't even address the problem? Did you notice the plaintiffs in the suit were two RBs, a LB, and a DB? How exactly have Goodell's "improvements to player safety" addressed ANY of those positions? Particularly the defensive players - seen any offensive players fined for helmet-to-helmet hits lately? No, me neither. It also seems to me that helmet-to-helmet hits on RBs are legal too. So how could the same lawsuit be avoided in Goodell's "new and safer" NFL?

A little common sense and personal accountability for one's choices on the part of the players wouldn't hurt either...

Craic
12-22-2011, 09:15 PM
Thats weird, did you edit your post? When I looked the only thing there was the first sentence, the one I quoted.

I did, sorry. But even so, I couldn't figure out what you meant by the first sentence of my post. It seems like you were responding to me saying that football shouldn't be played as hard, but that wasn't at all what I was saying. I was saying that basically, without pads and helmets, Harrison and others would adjust their method of football very fast, or they'd be on the sidelines with major injuries.

katmandu
12-22-2011, 11:04 PM
So Goodell's options are...?

Don't improve player safety and have him and the league get sued for millions upon millions

Or...

Improve player safety and get called Hitler by its fans?

Sounds like he is in a lose-lose.See, that's just it exactly.

It's the WAY GOD-ell has gone about implementing the changes to player safety.

He's gone about like a complete ASSHOLE!

It's clearly obvious to any person with a pulse that he's targeted the way the Steeler's play football.

You can't tell me there isn't more to this. There's a shitload of money being bet/spent of football betting pooling. There's also a lot of Steeler HATERS (aka JEALOUS) that are sick and tired of watching the Steeler's successes winning multiple playoffs and Super Bowls.

There's much more to this than these lawsuits ! Don't be niave !

NCSteeler
12-22-2011, 11:25 PM
So Goodell's options are...?

Don't improve player safety and have him and the league get sued for millions upon millions

Or...

Improve player safety and get called Hitler by its fans?

Sounds like he is in a lose-lose.

He is enforcing rules that don't even address 50 percent of the players on the field . How about forget corporate loyalty and sponsor a safe helmet competition, pretty sure the answer is that a ridell competitor already makes a safer helmet, he's worried about the bottom line not the players safety.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 05:22 AM
I dunno, how about making real improvements instead of window dressing in the form of completely asinine and arbitrary fines and more protection for high-priced QBs and WRs which don't even address the problem? Did you notice the plaintiffs in the suit were two RBs, a LB, and a DB? How exactly have Goodell's "improvements to player safety" addressed ANY of those positions? Particularly the defensive players - seen any offensive players fined for helmet-to-helmet hits lately? No, me neither. It also seems to me that helmet-to-helmet hits on RBs are legal too. So how could the same lawsuit be avoided in Goodell's "new and safer" NFL?

A little common sense and personal accountability for one's choices on the part of the players wouldn't hurt either...

So you want to eliminate helmet to helmet contact across the board? Like what college apparently has?

Yeah, that'll go over really well with the fans. If you think they hate him now, imagine what'd happen if those changes were implemented.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 05:23 AM
See, that's just it exactly.

It's the WAY GOD-ell has gone about implementing the changes to player safety.

He's gone about like a complete ASSHOLE!

It's clearly obvious to any person with a pulse that he's targeted the way the Steeler's play football.

You can't tell me there isn't more to this. There's a shitload of money being bet/spent of football betting pooling. There's also a lot of Steeler HATERS (aka JEALOUS) that are sick and tired of watching the Steeler's successes winning multiple playoffs and Super Bowls.

There's much more to this than these lawsuits ! Don't be niave !

Look at a weekly list of fines. Players from all over the league are getting fined. We're not the only ones. Each fan of their own team only pays the most attention to their own team, making it seem like they're targeted.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 05:26 AM
He is enforcing rules that don't even address 50 percent of the players on the field . How about forget corporate loyalty and sponsor a safe helmet competition, pretty sure the answer is that a ridell competitor already makes a safer helmet, he's worried about the bottom line not the players safety.

The NFL does a lot in trying to create a safer helmet. See post #26 in this thread.

http://www.steelersuniverse.com/forums/showthread.php/10982-Week-11-NFL-Fines-Chancellor-Miller-Jackson-Doucet-Laws?highlight=safer+helmets

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 05:28 AM
My point is that a lot of fans don't seem to realize how difficult of a situation this is for Goodell. There's pressure coming from all angles; from the NFLPA, former players, current players, Congress, media, and fans. Try balancing that to create a plan that everyone will love and accept.

Seriously, try it. Create a solution. You don't like what he's doing, you fix it.

Count Steeler
12-23-2011, 05:34 AM
My point is that a lot of fans don't seem to realize how difficult of a situation this is for Goodell. There's pressure coming from all angles; from the NFLPA, former players, current players, Congress, media, and fans. Try balancing that to create a plan that everyone will love and accept.

Seriously, try it. Create a solution. You don't like what he's doing, you fix it.

Consistency. No one will gripe if the rules are applied consistently. But you have some crews that are head shot happy and other crews that are more lenient. Even the video tapes of clear violations don't get fined consistently from the HO.

I think most of us have ceded the fact that rules are being implemented for player safety. If they are applied consistently, much of the complaining will cease.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 05:36 AM
My point is that a lot of fans don't seem to realize how difficult of a situation this is for Goodell. There's pressure coming from all angles; from the NFLPA, former players, current players, Congress, media, and fans. Try balancing that to create a plan that everyone will love and accept.

Seriously, try it. Create a solution. You don't like what he's doing, you fix it.

And let's spell out exactly what the issues are. Anyone else, feel free to add your own thoughts into what the obstacles are for each group.

NFLPA - Ensuring player safety, group that can have a lot of power/influence if they don't like what the league office's are doing
Former Players - Lawsuits over NFL failing to institute player safety protocl
Current Players - Limiting changes to the rules/creating clarity to current rules/"letting the players play" "making the game the way it used to be"
Congress - Research/transparency into player safety, namely concussions/head injuries
Media & fans (lumping them together here) - Similar to current players. Making them happy, limiting changes in rules.

BlacknGoldBabe
12-23-2011, 06:17 AM
Consistency. No one will gripe if the rules are applied consistently. But you have some crews that are head shot happy and other crews that are more lenient. Even the video tapes of clear violations don't get fined consistently from the HO.

I think most of us have ceded the fact that rules are being implemented for player safety. If they are applied consistently, much of the complaining will cease.

Consistency? How does one achieve this? Seems that all of the refs will have to attend a new training class to clarify exactly what to call and what to let go.

On the other hand, these players know exactly what they're letting themselves in for. A friend of mine has a son who played high school football and has a permanent brain injury from a faulty helmet liner. The players want to hold the NFL solely responsible for their injuries. Seems to me that the equipment manufacturers ought to be held accountable.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 06:22 AM
Consistency. No one will gripe if the rules are applied consistently. But you have some crews that are head shot happy and other crews that are more lenient. Even the video tapes of clear violations don't get fined consistently from the HO.

I think most of us have ceded the fact that rules are being implemented for player safety. If they are applied consistently, much of the complaining will cease.

And I agree, consistency is truly the key.

But it is a tough thing to accomplish, no? I can't even imagine how difficult it is to be a ref and try to look at these split-second collisions and be able to dissect it frame-by-frame. And it's a job where you get all the blame and none of the credit. You'll always hear how the ref made a bad call. Those guys never get any Christmas cards, nature of the job.

HometownGal
12-23-2011, 06:27 AM
When you signed on the dotted line of an NFL contract, you agreed to all of the risks involved with playing, including concussions. Don't come back and sue the league for the choice that YOU made.

And BINGO was his name-o. Couldn't have said it any better myself. :applaudit:

They chose a career where physical play is a given and injuries are almost a certainty. No one put guns to their heads and made them choose that "career" or continue in the NFL.

NCSteeler
12-23-2011, 06:43 AM
And I agree, consistency is truly the key.

But it is a tough thing to accomplish, no? I can't even imagine how difficult it is to be a ref and try to look at these split-second collisions and be able to dissect it frame-by-frame. And it's a job where you get all the blame and none of the credit. You'll always hear how the ref made a bad call. Those guys never get any Christmas cards, nature of the job.

Imagine how tough it is for a full speed linebacker to make that same split second decision and then change his body position or speed.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 06:49 AM
Imagine how tough it is for a full speed linebacker to make that same split second decision and then change his body position or speed.

And I recognize that is tough to.

But you're choosing to play. Which means you play under the rules created for you. If you don't like it, the door is right there.

NCSteeler
12-23-2011, 06:55 AM
And let's spell out exactly what the issues are. Anyone else, feel free to add your own thoughts into what the obstacles are for each group.

Let's take a more honest view of it
NFLPA - Ensuring player safety, group that can have a lot of power/influence if they don't like what the league office's are doing, ensuring they get the biggest cut of the money for Medical and retired players possible
Former Players - Lawsuits over NFL failing to institute player safety protocl, no lawsuits have said they wanted the league to do better, just fork over the cash
Current Players - Limiting changes to the rules/creating clarity to current rules/"letting the players play" "making the game the way it used to be"

Congress - Research/transparency into player safety, namely concussions/head injuries , constantly ensuring self importance and the ability to force yourself on every situation that draws TV/Media coverage , especially on channels that would normally not even mention anythign political or goverment related
Media & fans (lumping them together here) - Similar to current players. Making them happy, limiting changes in rules.

The Union is what it is, it is there to ensure the players and their interests, mostly financial, are looked after
Former Players want money because they see all the money coming through the league now and the salaries and they want more than they got while playing.
Current Players just wanna play and not be fined and flagged for un intentional hits and hard play, even among the group being protected, QBs and WRs you don't hear many speaking out to support the leagues new system
Congress, seriously, they just wanna be on TV and get re-elected
Media wants ratings and they don't care how they get them, I think many have realized they have drive with the current commish and run with stories to pressure him in to it, then they can say we had it first
Fans want to see great football action without constant interruptions from the refs, I mean it's to the point where after every big play the announcers pause a second and then say "no flag on it"

I still insist until the league shows they are seriously looking into better helmets and head monitoring systems, the rest is just a facade, really the bulk of ex players who truly suffer debilitating post life symptoms are not even protected under the current fine system.

fansince'76
12-23-2011, 08:58 AM
So you want to eliminate helmet to helmet contact across the board? Like what college apparently has?

Yeah, that'll go over really well with the fans. If you think they hate him now, imagine what'd happen if those changes were implemented.

No. I've stated before that I feel that he needs to mandate the use of safer equipment and stop trying to legislate unavoidable helmet-to-helmet hits out of the game by fines and rules changes, because those aren't working. And the study you cited in that older post you linked about how the NFL is trying to make a safer helmet is just more window dressing, IMO. Demonstrably safer equipment than what is being used IS out there and readily available. If he was serious about trying to fix the problem instead of just trying to placate the media whenever there's an uproar over a helmet-to-helmet hit, I feel that he'd mandate its use. You really want to completely eliminate head trauma in the NFL? Then you may as well go to flag football, because it's not going to happen. Of course, that's the direction it's going anyway...

zulater
12-23-2011, 09:25 AM
So Goodell's options are...?

Don't improve player safety and have him and the league get sued for millions upon millions

Or...

Improve player safety and get called Hitler by its fans?

Sounds like he is in a lose-lose.

So if you're buying all the nonsense that Goodell's shoveling, how does his 18 game vision fit into aiding player safety?

steelreserve
12-23-2011, 11:26 AM
Consistency. No one will gripe if the rules are applied consistently. But you have some crews that are head shot happy and other crews that are more lenient. Even the video tapes of clear violations don't get fined consistently from the HO.

I think most of us have ceded the fact that rules are being implemented for player safety. If they are applied consistently, much of the complaining will cease.

If THESE rules are applied consistently, I'll still be pissed. They're stupid rules. It would be like if MLB made a rule saying "home runs are OK, but only if you hit them on a fastball; if you hit a home run on a slider or a changeup, you're out."

I cringe whenever I see a roughing-the-passer or helmet-to-helmet flag, whether it's against the Steelers, our opponent, or just some random game that happens to be on. It shouldn't be part of the game.

Count Steeler
12-23-2011, 11:54 AM
If THESE rules are applied consistently, I'll still be pissed. They're stupid rules. It would be like if MLB made a rule saying "home runs are OK, but only if you hit them on a fastball; if you hit a home run on a slider or a changeup, you're out."

I cringe whenever I see a roughing-the-passer or helmet-to-helmet flag, whether it's against the Steelers, our opponent, or just some random game that happens to be on. It shouldn't be part of the game.

I am not a proponent of the new rules. Just saying if they were applied consistently, there would be less bitching.

Count Steeler
12-23-2011, 11:58 AM
And I agree, consistency is truly the key.

But it is a tough thing to accomplish, no? I can't even imagine how difficult it is to be a ref and try to look at these split-second collisions and be able to dissect it frame-by-frame. And it's a job where you get all the blame and none of the credit. You'll always hear how the ref made a bad call. Those guys never get any Christmas cards, nature of the job.

The refs are one issue. There will always be some crews that call games better than others. That is part of the humanness of the game.

However, when the head office peruses the videos of the week and they choose to fine certain players for certain hits and not others for very similar hits, then credibility has left the building.

Count Steeler
12-23-2011, 12:02 PM
Consistency? How does one achieve this? Seems that all of the refs will have to attend a new training class to clarify exactly what to call and what to let go.

On the other hand, these players know exactly what they're letting themselves in for. A friend of mine has a son who played high school football and has a permanent brain injury from a faulty helmet liner. The players want to hold the NFL solely responsible for their injuries. Seems to me that the equipment manufacturers ought to be held accountable.

Even under the "old" rules some crews were better at calling games than other crews. The refs that "let them play it out" have many more enjoyable games than the ones that can't keep the yellow flag in their pants. Nothing worse than a crew that calls five penalties in a row.

Count Steeler
12-23-2011, 12:06 PM
Perfect example is a play from last night's game. Some time in the first half Garcon grabbed and tugged on a defenders jersey 30 or 40 yards down field. Mayock was upset that there was not offensive interference on the play. If the defender had grabbed the jersey, there would have been an interference call for sure.

This was not incidental by any means. It was quite flagrant.

Dino 6 Rings
12-23-2011, 12:12 PM
my point is why 15 years later are we even talking about this...

1996, Sports Illustrated Article with Greg Lloyd:

Lloyd still bristles at being fined so heavily, just as he fumes over what he considers the league's hypocrisy. "Come to a game early and watch the Jumbotron scoreboard," he says. "You'll see 'NFL's Greatest Hits,' with guys getting their helmets ripped off and [former Miami Dolphin] Nat Moore getting hit so hard he spins around like a helicopter. They're marketing that. Then I go and put a hit on a guy, and no flag is thrown. The ref says, 'That was a pretty damn good hit,' and the league says, 'We're going to fine you $12,000.' "

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1007711/1/index.htm

You mean it took the NFL that long to actually care?

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 03:13 PM
The Union is what it is, it is there to ensure the players and their interests, mostly financial, are looked after
Former Players want money because they see all the money coming through the league now and the salaries and they want more than they got while playing.
Current Players just wanna play and not be fined and flagged for un intentional hits and hard play, even among the group being protected, QBs and WRs you don't hear many speaking out to support the leagues new system
Congress, seriously, they just wanna be on TV and get re-elected
Media wants ratings and they don't care how they get them, I think many have realized they have drive with the current commish and run with stories to pressure him in to it, then they can say we had it first
Fans want to see great football action without constant interruptions from the refs, I mean it's to the point where after every big play the announcers pause a second and then say "no flag on it"

I still insist until the league shows they are seriously looking into better helmets and head monitoring systems, the rest is just a facade, really the bulk of ex players who truly suffer debilitating post life symptoms are not even protected under the current fine system.

So Goodell and the league should tell this to those groups.

"Hey Congress, you're just looking for air-time so I'm not going to listen to you"

"Hey former players, you're just looking for another paycheck. I don't care about your lawsuit"

Even if Goodell really thinks those things, he can't say that and he can't approach it that way. That's not what a person in a professional business can do. He has to listen to these people because they do have power/importance.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 03:17 PM
No. I've stated before that I feel that he needs to mandate the use of safer equipment and stop trying to legislate unavoidable helmet-to-helmet hits out of the game by fines and rules changes, because those aren't working. And the study you cited in that older post you linked about how the NFL is trying to make a safer helmet is just more window dressing, IMO. Demonstrably safer equipment than what is being used IS out there and readily available. If he was serious about trying to fix the problem instead of just trying to placate the media whenever there's an uproar over a helmet-to-helmet hit, I feel that he'd mandate its use. You really want to completely eliminate head trauma in the NFL? Then you may as well go to flag football, because it's not going to happen. Of course, that's the direction it's going anyway...

In the link I gave, two of the top doctors of that concussion committee said they don't want the NFL to have an offical, mandated helmet. Which even surprised me. And I'd imagine there are others who agree if some of the brightest feel that way.

Goodell should defer to his commitee's opinion because they are the experts. If they say it shouldn't happen, then I'll defer to them as well.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 03:19 PM
So if you're buying all the nonsense that Goodell's shoveling, how does his 18 game vision fit into aiding player safety?

Goodell has essentially told the players that he will only implement an 18 game season if they and the NFLPA signs off on it.

The issue will be brought up next year, I believe. Goodell will again ask those groups to sign off on the idea. If they do not, then there will be no 18 game season despite the fact Goodell, under the old CBA at least, had the authority to implement it without their consent.

Chidi29
12-23-2011, 03:27 PM
my point is why 15 years later are we even talking about this...

1996, Sports Illustrated Article with Greg Lloyd:

Lloyd still bristles at being fined so heavily, just as he fumes over what he considers the league's hypocrisy. "Come to a game early and watch the Jumbotron scoreboard," he says. "You'll see 'NFL's Greatest Hits,' with guys getting their helmets ripped off and [former Miami Dolphin] Nat Moore getting hit so hard he spins around like a helicopter. They're marketing that. Then I go and put a hit on a guy, and no flag is thrown. The ref says, 'That was a pretty damn good hit,' and the league says, 'We're going to fine you $12,000.' "

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1007711/1/index.htm

You mean it took the NFL that long to actually care?

Which is one big misconception about what Goodell has done. He is certainly not the first one to fine/suspend players or take away defenses as some fans claim.

Pete Rozelle suspended Mel Morgan for a game in the 70s. He added the Mel Blount rule to open up offenses.

We're seeing the fines that happened under Taglibue.

Player safety has always increased and each commissioner has become more and more strict. Goodell is just following the line.

Craic
12-23-2011, 10:57 PM
I wonder when people are going to realize that the game CANT go back to what it was. Even if they re-instituted ALL the rules of the early 70's, it'd still be a very different game.

The players are much bigger now, the average weight of a Steeler has increased by 24 pounds.
They're much faster now as well. Heck, Lambert's best forty was in the upper 4's, and he was considered fast (much better than his 6 he ran a couple years before that).

The kinetics of the game as changed and as such, the rules are going to change with it because bigger and faster and poorer tackling skills equal more injury. So where any of you want to see the change?

Weight restrictions on players?
Speed restrictions?
or Rule changes?

Because the PLAYERS have changed too much for the game not to change.

ALLD
12-24-2011, 07:21 AM
The NFL is assuming they are going to lose the lawsuit. Instead of getting out in front of it and explaining the known risks, they are hiding in a corner behind James Harrison.

Everybody forgets about the evolution of golf in Scotland. When the game first originated you were allowed to send your caddy out with any club up to #5 and whack an opposing player behind the knees (fact). In addition, you could substitute another player's ball for one filled with nitroglycerene up to one per 18 holes. However, this had a tendency to reduce the playing field.

What should be done is to set up a retired players fund which covered medical treatment and retirement, but the owners would have to pay for it. With the new tv contracts there should be plenty of $ for everybody, but expect it to be the last big dollar comprehensive deal.