PDA

View Full Version : Tweak the "no helmet, play stops" rule



Psycho Ward 86
08-28-2011, 06:19 PM
Now although it didnt end up becoming the situation on Saturday, there needs to be some kind of tweak to the new(ish) rule that the play stops once the ball carrier's helmet comes off. If that's the case, then defenders are going to start taking advantage of ball carriers and simply start de-helmeting opposing players. A situation where this did come into play was last week when the Cowboys rookie RB Phillip Tanner, made a monstrously tough run against the Chargers, breaking through multiple tackles and getting his helmet taken off in the backfield, but advanced the ball all the way to the endzone...only to have the play result in a 5 yard loss. This could be even worse with scrambling quarterbacks like Ben, who's going to be well beyond 5 yards on a lot of passing plays when he drops back.

Anybody else find this rule a bit cheap?

The Duke
08-28-2011, 06:37 PM
I watched that play. Immediately stopped watching the game after that

Pathetic!

BigNastyDefense
08-28-2011, 07:03 PM
I think the rule is BS. I understand it's player safety but come on.

Chidi29
08-28-2011, 07:33 PM
I get the rule. Helmets are there for a reason. Like a QB on a turnover (under the old rules, that is), everyone is looking to deliver a big blow to a guy without a helmet.

salamander
08-28-2011, 07:37 PM
What happens if a helmet-less player is running down the field and gets hit in the head with a defender's helmet (or anything else for that matter). Then what? I can understand the rule.

zulater
08-28-2011, 07:46 PM
I get the rule. Helmets are there for a reason. Like a QB on a turnover (under the old rules, that is), everyone is looking to deliver a big blow to a guy without a helmet.

Is there anything Goodell's done you don't like?

The rule sucks and takes away from the game, just like every other one of the new rules instituted under Goodell's reign of stupidity.

Chidi29
08-28-2011, 07:52 PM
Is there anything Goodell's done you don't like?

The rule sucks and takes away from the game, just like every other one of the new rules instituted under Goodell's reign of stupidity.

Yes, plenty.

Is there anything he's done that you do like?

It's easy from your point of view to want the rule gone. Because you're not accountable if a player ends up getting smashed into the turt by a big lineman and suffers a life altering injury.

zulater
08-28-2011, 07:55 PM
Yes, plenty.

Is there anything he's done that you do like?

It's easy from your point of view to want the rule gone. Because you're not accountable if a player ends up getting smashed into the turt by a big lineman and suffers a life altering injury.

So Roger will be on the hook for an injury that occurs on a play that's been happening for nearly 90 years of NFL football?

zulater
08-28-2011, 08:03 PM
btw I didn't mind the way Goodell handled the lockout for the most part and said as much on this board throughout the league's labor strife.

Psycho Ward 86
08-28-2011, 08:35 PM
Wow fellas, i didnt mean that a person without a helmet should be able to get railed.

They should have some kind of wrinkle, like 'the play isnt blown dead until the helmet less player is touched down'

and eject/heavily penalize players who try to do anything more than that to a helmet less player. I mean gosh, it's such a dumb rule if you think about it, just another advantageous rule that favors one side.

Count Steeler
08-28-2011, 09:04 PM
I think the refs have to blow the play dead. Too many bad things can happen. I for one don't want any of our players continuing a play without a helmet, not worth the risk. Touchdown or not, got to stop it.

I don't think we can conclusively say that Suh knew that Opie had lost his helmet when the Lions played the Bengals, and Opie could have been seriously injured. The refs need to get on this and protect the player as soon as possible.

Chidi29
08-28-2011, 09:10 PM
So Roger will be on the hook for an injury that occurs on a play that's been happening for nearly 90 years of NFL football?

Yes because he has the knowledge and ability to prevent it as much as he can.

Chidi29
08-28-2011, 09:11 PM
Wow fellas, i didnt mean that a person without a helmet should be able to get railed.

They should have some kind of wrinkle, like 'the play isnt blown dead until the helmet less player is touched down'

and eject/heavily penalize players who try to do anything more than that to a helmet less player. I mean gosh, it's such a dumb rule if you think about it, just another advantageous rule that favors one side.

At that point, you're forcing the players to alter the way they play the game. Which is what you guys hate Goodell is doing, right?

fansince'76
08-28-2011, 09:15 PM
I think the refs have to blow the play dead. Too many bad things can happen. I for one don't want any of our players continuing a play without a helmet, not worth the risk. Touchdown or not, got to stop it.

I agree. And since it really doesn't happen that often, it won't impact the game that much.

zulater
08-28-2011, 09:28 PM
Yes because he has the knowledge and ability to prevent it as much as he can.

You can't play scared if you're the NFL. By that standard anything short of making the game into flag or touch football will place the owners and commisioner on the hook for future lawsuits. It's tackle football, it's a violent game, the players know what they're signing up for when they join up. They can sue after the fact if they want, but they wont win, because just about every NFL player played the same game in high school and college, so it's impossible to attribute everything to the league, and they knew the inherent risk coming in.

Chidi29
08-28-2011, 09:32 PM
You can't play scared if you're the NFL. By that standard anything short of making the game into flag or touch football will place the owners and commisioner on the hook for future lawsuits. It's tackle football, it's a violent game, the players know what they're signing up for when they join up. They can sue after the fact if they want, but they wont win, because just about every NFL player played the same game in high school and college, so it's impossible to attribute everything to the league, and they knew the inherent risk coming in.

The NFL is trying to even prevent lawsuits because they're messy and there is no guarantee you'll win.

If you're the NFL, you cover your butt as much as possible. It's a smart business move and at the same time, does help the players safety.

zulater
08-28-2011, 09:36 PM
The NFL is trying to even prevent lawsuits because they're messy and there is no guarantee you'll win.

If you're the NFL, you cover your butt as much as possible. It's a smart business move and at the same time, does help the players safety.

It's a slipperly slope and short slide to a future of non tackle football I'm afraid.

X-Terminator
08-28-2011, 09:51 PM
I don't have a problem with this rule either - it's one that actually does protect players' safety. I certainly would not want any Steeler without a helmet taking a head shot from a helmeted player, intentional or not. Plus, you can get hurt bad by simply banging your helmetless head off the turf. I don't see any reason to tweak it.

XxKnightxX
08-28-2011, 09:55 PM
Last I heard, you tighten up those chinstraps to prevent those types of incidents. A helmet is a helmet, not a baseball cap that flies off with a love tap. The rule sucks, but cant argue against it.

Psycho Ward 86
08-28-2011, 09:57 PM
At that point, you're forcing the players to alter the way they play the game. Which is what you guys hate Goodell is doing, right?

Uh, don't stereotype into the same audience that you're thinking. And this is different. Yeah i know what you're thinking, it's still about player safety. Well of course it is, but this is something players with sly intentions will take advantage of, something they cant really do with most of these "safety rule." If the play is blown dead as soon as the helmet comes off, how many more helmets do you think you're going to see intentionally ripped off, especially on quarterbacks dropping back deep in their own backfield to sling one long? Oh snap, 2nd and 5 just turned into 3rd and 20. And it's not like ripping helmets off is safe either, plenty of career ending injuries to the neck to prove that. And i dont like the sound of broken necks just because a defender thought his best chance to stop the play was to constrict the head and rip it off.

steeldevil
08-28-2011, 10:01 PM
You would think that this new rule would have teams/coaches make sure the player's helmets are on as tight as possible, but I have seen several helmets come off very easy this preseason.

The helmet should not come off without the chin strap being undone. If a helmet flies off and the chin strap is still buckled, that shit needs to be tightened up....

steeldevil
08-28-2011, 10:04 PM
Uh, don't stereotype into the same audience that you're thinking. And this is different. Yeah i know what you're thinking, it's still about player safety. Well of course it is, but this is something players with sly intentions will take advantage of, something they cant really do with most of these "safety rule." If the play is blown dead as soon as the helmet comes off, how many more helmets do you think you're going to see intentionally ripped off, especially on quarterbacks dropping back deep in their own backfield to sling one long? Oh snap, 2nd and 5 just turned into 3rd and 20. And it's not like ripping helmets off is safe either, plenty of career ending injuries to the neck to prove that. And i dont like the sound of broken necks just because a defender thought his best chance to stop the play was to constrict the head and rip it off.

I'm pretty sure intentionally ripping off a helmet is an unneccessary roughness penalty or something. But you are right, some players may try it. I doubt it becomes a common tactic though because flags will almost certainly be thrown.

Craic
08-28-2011, 11:13 PM
I'd say either keep the rule, or make ALL the players remove both helmets and shoulder pads. After all, what was once safety equipment, is now pretty much a weapon (in the football sense).

X-Terminator
08-28-2011, 11:46 PM
I'm pretty sure intentionally ripping off a helmet is an unneccessary roughness penalty or something. But you are right, some players may try it. I doubt it becomes a common tactic though because flags will almost certainly be thrown.

Exactly. No player will intentionally do that and risk not only a penalty, but a possible fine as well. So the scenario he pointed out will not happen often, if at all.

NCSteeler
08-29-2011, 01:56 AM
While were on the subject, should ripping a QBs helmet off be a roughing penalty???

Steeldude
08-29-2011, 03:34 AM
What happens if a helmet-less player is running down the field and gets hit in the head with a defender's helmet (or anything else for that matter). Then what? I can understand the rule.

part of the game. if the carrier doesn't like it then go to the ground.

Chidi29
08-29-2011, 06:27 AM
Uh, don't stereotype into the same audience that you're thinking. And this is different. Yeah i know what you're thinking, it's still about player safety. Well of course it is, but this is something players with sly intentions will take advantage of, something they cant really do with most of these "safety rule." If the play is blown dead as soon as the helmet comes off, how many more helmets do you think you're going to see intentionally ripped off, especially on quarterbacks dropping back deep in their own backfield to sling one long? Oh snap, 2nd and 5 just turned into 3rd and 20. And it's not like ripping helmets off is safe either, plenty of career ending injuries to the neck to prove that. And i dont like the sound of broken necks just because a defender thought his best chance to stop the play was to constrict the head and rip it off.

I highly doubt that the Flacon was tyring to intentionally rip off Ben's helmet knowing the play would stop if he did. It's much easier just to try and tackle him than take his helmet off.

Count Steeler
08-29-2011, 10:28 AM
While were on the subject, should ripping a QBs helmet off be a roughing penalty???

Yes. Unless the QB is wearing the number 7 and/or is wearing black and gold. Read the fine print.

BigNastyDefense
08-29-2011, 10:38 AM
My problem is that if the helmet comes off, the play stops right there. So if a RB's helmet comes off in the backfield, it's a loss of down and yardage even though the RB wasn't tackled. Or even an offensive or defensive lineman get theirs knocked off for that matter.

While helmets won't get ripped off intentionally (I hope), it's bs that it's a loss of down and yardage of this happens in the backfield.

I've said it before, the NFL's stance on player safety is bullshit. If it was for real, they'd be forcing players who suffer a concussion to wear the better helmet the rest of the season, and all players to wear double-sided mouth pieces because those have been factually shown to help stop and reduce concussions and other injuries because they keep the upper and lower jaw from slamming together.

But instead, the NFL tried to fundamentally change the game, all by restricting the defense. This is the first thing I have seen the NFL put in under Goodell that could hurt the offense.

Goodell is about $$$. He wants to bring in the casual fan who wants touchdowns and high scoring affairs. Goodell doesn't want the normal Steelers-Ravens 14-13 slugfest.

Psycho Ward 86
08-29-2011, 12:04 PM
I highly doubt that the Flacon was tyring to intentionally rip off Ben's helmet knowing the play would stop if he did. It's much easier just to try and tackle him than take his helmet off.

that's highly debatable. And just like snowflakes, no two tackles in football are exactly alike, and on some occasions ripping off the helmet will be the easiest thing to do.

Chidi29
08-29-2011, 12:08 PM
that's highly debatable. And just like snowflakes, no two tackles in football are exactly alike, and on some occasions ripping off the helmet will be the easiest thing to do.

Considering the risk of penalty (yes, I know there was no penalty Saturday) I doubt it's a players first option. Or second, or third.

smokin3000gt
08-29-2011, 02:52 PM
Well for one, it will make players more likely to buckle both straps instead of just one but I think if a helmet comes off, it should be a replay of down. Not a loss of down. I also think if the QB helmet gets ripped off, it should be a roughing penalty. It was mostly likely ripped off by the face mask or from underneath but either way it can cause neck injury. Could you imagine if P. Manning had his helmet ripped off after being balled up? If this shit keeps going on, I wouldn't be surprised to see the league get a letter asking them to review the lack of roughing penalties. Starting with the infamous face punch that made Ben's nose look like a banana.

Psycho Ward 86
08-29-2011, 02:54 PM
Considering the risk of penalty (yes, I know there was no penalty Saturday) I doubt it's a players first option. Or second, or third.

And yet it happens. So why not account for it.

Chidi29
08-29-2011, 04:42 PM
And yet it happens. So why not account for it.

What other instances are there of this? Of a player intentionally ripping a helmet off?

HollywoodSteel
08-29-2011, 05:27 PM
What is the rule if a defender's helmet comes off? If that ends the play then I'd have my entire defense wear super loose helmets and toss their heads forward as soon as a QB drops back. Sack on every play.

Nadroj 20
08-29-2011, 05:53 PM
How many times have you seen this happen? It is rare and I don't mind the rule. It is a rule at every other level of football too.

HollywoodSteel
08-29-2011, 09:31 PM
In all seriousness I don't think this rule is that big a deal, and I'm very much against the pussification of the NFL. If you're the ball carrier and your helmet pops off on its own, that's either your fault or the equipment manger's fault. If a defender rips it off, that's a 15 yard penalty (unless you do it to Big Ben, in which case it's perfectly legal). I can't see how it's advantages for a defender to try and rip off your helmet. Generally if a defender is in a position to do this, he is also in position to make the actual tackle... which also ends the play. :)