Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

[steelblood]

[url="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cole_nfl_fine_system_unlikely_to_deter_steelers_05 2411"]http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=j ... ers_052411[/url]

Jason Cole - "In addition to the plan laid out by Birch, the league upgraded the rule on hits on defenseless players, making it so that receivers would have a chance to gather themselves and make a move before the defender could hit them, Atlanta president and NFL Competition Committee Chairman Rich McKay explained."

Wait. What? This can't be right. Defenders now need to wait until the receiver is ready before hitting or tackling them? If this is in any way true, it would fundamentally change the game.

[BradshawsHairdresser]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-cole_nfl_fine_system_unlikely_to_deter_steelers_05 2411

Jason Cole - "In addition to the plan laid out by Birch, the league upgraded the rule on hits on defenseless players, making it so that receivers would have a chance to gather themselves and make a move before the defender could hit them, Atlanta president and NFL Competition Committee Chairman Rich McKay explained."

Wait. What? This can't be right. Defenders now need to wait until the receiver is ready before hitting or tackling them? If this is in any way true, it would fundamentally change the game.

If you think you're confused, think how the officials and the players must be feeling.
Just another move in a series that is ruining the game, IMO.

[papillon]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

I guess there won't be any more well timed hits to jar the ball loose after a completion. This will embolden receivers to use the middle of the field knowing they can't be hot until they've taken a stride or two. It will make receivers that wouldn't go anywhere near the middle of the field feel empowered to do so and, of course, it will drive scoring up, which at the end of the day I think is what the NFL wants and the new generation of football fan wants. Us old school guys that would rather see a well played 20-17 football game with offense and defense are going to have to get used to scores like 31-27 and 38-34 with very little defense or watch something else.

Every rule starting with the Mel Blount rule was put in place to increase offense. The defenses have adjusted each time and were still able to be dominant. Now, the NFL is finally going to get the results they want, because, they're going to attack defensive players wallets and not necessarily the rules. Even millionaires don't want anyone reaching into their wallets for money. The NFL will be successful in turning the game into an Arena football league game by attacking the finances of the players.

Pappy

[Djfan]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

I seriously wonder if I can keep on being a fan. I just can't stand the direction of the NFL.

UFL, here I come.

[ikestops85]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

I just want to know what part of the uniform they are putting velcro to stick the flags on.

[steelblood]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

It can't be right. He must have misrepresented what McKay said. There is no way defenders need to wait until the receiver is ready to tackle them. Right?

And, if it is true, how is this not the story? Why is he concentrating on how the Steelers won't change? Shouldn't the story be -- how does this change how the game is played and what will it do to the quality of the game and its integrity? Has the world gone mad?

No way owners approve such a change 32-0.

[hawaiiansteel]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

May 25, 2011

Steelers players rip new rule

ESPN.com news services


The NFL's new proposal to punish teams for their players' multiple flagrant hits that result in fines has been nicknamed by some in the league as the "Steelers rule." Not surprisingly, some of the hardest hitters on Pittsburgh's defense took to social media to blast the league's new initiative.

The punishment will be financial, although league vice president Adolpho Birch said Tuesday he didn't rule out commissioner Roger Goodell applying further sanctions, such as stripping clubs of draft choices. Also Tuesday, owners approved rules amendments for player safety, targeting launching and further defining what qualifies as a defenseless player.

In his news conference Wednesday to wrap up the spring owners meetings in Indianapolis, Goodell said the "objective is to have a club accountability" in making the game safer. He said he hasn't contemplated yet whether he would take draft picks away from teams, but he did say the NFL would summon teams to the league offices in New York to discuss problems, if needed.

"We're all responsible for making this game as safe as possible," he said.

Birch would not identify which 2010 teams would have been subject to fines had the policy been in place then, but did say at least three teams might have been punished. One player, Pittsburgh All-Pro linebacker James Harrison, was fined $100,000 for flagrant hits last season.

"We'll check the number of fines and the level of fines going out for infractions that relate to various player safety violations," Birch said. "Particularly head and helmet issues."

Harrison expressed his displeasure on his Twitter account Tuesday.

"I'm absolutely sure now after this last rule change that the people making the rules at the NFL are idiots," Harrison said.

Teammate LaMarr Woodley also spoke out through his Twitter account.

"Thoughts on "the steelers rule"??? lol im sorry that im not sorry we hit 2 hard," he wrote.

Steelers president Art Rooney II told USA Today that he's reserving judgment for now.

"I'm not going to say I'm opposed to it. I would hope that it's something that is used judiciously, that is sort of reserved for repeated type of conduct," Rooney said. "I think if it's handled that way, it'll probably be effective. It's still under discussion."

The NFL began a crackdown on illegal hits, particularly those to defenseless players, last October. It threatened suspensions, but no players had to sit out games. However, Ray Anderson, the league's chief disciplinarian, has said suspensions will be considered for egregious hits this season.

The 32 owners voted unanimously Tuesday to approve rules amendments for player safety, including a measure aimed at keeping a player from launching himself into a defenseless opponent. A 15-yard penalty will result for anyone who leaves both feet before contact to spring forward and upward into an opponent and delivers a blow to the helmet with any part of his helmet.

Such tackles will also be subject to fines.

The definition of a defenseless receiver already has been extended. Now, a receiver who has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner even if both feet are on the ground is considered defenseless.

If the commissioner is serious about going so far as to strip teams of draft choices, you can bet coaches will emphasize tackling within the rules, Mike Sando writes. Blog

Defenseless players cannot be hit in the head or neck area with the helmet, face mask, forearm or shoulder. The definition of such players now includes those throwing a pass; attempting or completing a catch without having time to ward off or avoid contact; a runner whose forward progress has been stopped by a tackler; kickoff or punt returners while the ball is in the air; kickers or punters during a kick or a return; a quarterback during a change of possession; a player who receives a blindside block from a blocker moving toward his own end zone.

Penalized players are subject to being ejected for flagrant fouls.

Also, hits to the head of a passer that are not considered "forcible" blows will not be penalized.

"We are not saying to take the physicality out of the game in any way, shape or form," competition committee co-chairman Rich McKay, president of the Atlanta Falcons, said. "There are still lots of hits that are legal.

[url="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6586630"]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6586630[/url]

[steelblood]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

Ok. Good. From that I take it that you can hit receivers immediately just not in the head or neck. Jason Cole's oversimplification is ridiculous.

[Chadman]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

"Defenseless players cannot be hit in the head or neck area with the helmet, face mask, forearm or shoulder."

NO! Make it simple. You can't hit a player in the head or neck- why define what you can't hit them with? Can't hit a player with the forearm or shoulder...but I take it from this that the fist is ok?

"The definition of such players now includes those throwing a pass:"

"attempting or completing a catch without having time to ward off or avoid contact"

HOW DO YOU JUDGE THIS CORRECTLY?? When is suitable 'time' to adjust & ward of defenders? Airy-fairy rule definition. Just say this- "Can't hit/tackle a player not in possession of the ball." Anything else is too hard to police & will only cause confusion for the officials on the field.

"a runner whose forward progress has been stopped by a tackler"

And as a result, all ball runners must obligingly fall to the ground on first contact & not try to fight for any extra yardage.

"kickoff or punt returners while the ball is in the air"

So...Don't hit a player not in possession of the ball..

"kickers or punters during a kick or a return"

I hope this doesn't include blocking a player during a return...other than that- doesn't this rule already exist?

"a quarterback during a change of possession"

Why not- Don't hit/tackle a player not in possession of the ball? You know- that simple, easy to follow rule I mentioned earlier?


"a player who receives a blindside block from a blocker moving toward his own end zone."

This still confuses me. You can't hit/launch/tackle a player that recieves a blindside block, so long as the blocker is moving towards his own end zone? What does this mean??

[RuthlessBurgher]

Re: Jason Cole article on rule changes. I'm confused.

"a player who receives a blindside block from a blocker moving toward his own end zone."

This still confuses me. You can't hit/launch/tackle a player that recieves a blindside block, so long as the blocker is moving towards his own end zone? What does this mean??

I think this one means one thing only (it's so simple a caveman can do it).

Hines Ward Break Keith Rivers' Jaw. Bad.