No one wants to see anyone get hurt, if the defensive backs uses perfect form, without using the crown of the helmet IT'S A LEGAL HIT! I think the speed of the game is not allowing the refs to formulate a clear definition of the rules. Its ridiculous to call a penalty for roughness on a clean hit!
Case in point : The Demps hit against the Washington receiver was a legal knockout. The receiver was hurt, but that's not a justifiable reason to call a penalty.
Another point about the rules is awarding an automatic first down for contact downfield, that could have been initiated by the receiver. This seems to be a brewing misunderstanding , that will have an impact on meaningful games down the line.
It's most difficult for defensive backs these days.
Since defensive back are a premium I believe the Giants should bring up the rookie DB's Bennett Jackson and Fenner to gain more playing time.
Oh yea demps led with his crown get over it.
Lowering your head in the open field is unacceptable.
Oh yea demps led with his crown get over it.
As I remember it, Demps did not lead with his head, that is if you mean he aimed it at the receiver. His head was down but not aimed at the receivers body, his shoulder was. In fact, he hit his own man with his head and the only contact with the receiver's helmet was a result of the receiver lowering his head.
I disagree with you and agree with bhill. The NFL cannot simply ignore evidence that the way the game has always been played is causing brain injuries. You might be able to bury your head in the sand, but the league can't. It has a legal and moral responsibility to act. It also has a practical responsibility--if football cannot be made safer than it will deservedly die.
League of Denial - ( New Window )
They don't really care about player safety, they care about making sure every game is high scoring so the casual fans and the fantasy nerds can be happy. Keep football as football and let the fantasy nerds play dungeons and dragons or something else which doesn't ruin a great sport.
Increased illegal contact penalties cause big hits on defenseless receivers? Please do explain, Joe Cool.
don't know what the poster had in mind, but one idea is
allow more contact on receivers > return to lots of running plays > fewer hits on receiver.
of course, if you saw football in the 70's you would see the Raiders unloading on WR's prior to throws. but I guess anything leading to fewer passing plays lowers hits on WR's.