Looks like a good clean hit. But because the QB was caught so flat footed the ref overreached with his decision imv. Defender does put a little extra “oomph” into once the QB was basically down but not to the point of drawing a penalty.
They want the defender to roll not drive the qb into the turf ie Aaron Rodgers. That is what they are teaching now. The defender clearly tried and succeeded in landing and driving his shoulder into the qbs chest. This hit could have been easily avoided if he maintained his initial angle on the hit. Call it a bad call whatever you want but isn’t he new nfl this was the correct call
If every aspect of a tackle is going to be micromanaged it is yet another impending fail waiting to happen.
You drive a QB into the ground by slamming him, not from completing a tackle where your body weight continues to move in the direction you are heading.
It shouldn't be incumbent on tacklers to start to reposition themselves mid-tackle.
Do you have the link to the BBI thread on this. I'd like to read up on the discussion.
My view is that is absolutely a penalty. The moment the Viking rolls his shoulder driving the QB into the ground is the source of the penalty. If the Viking just continues to run through and sack the QB without the extra effort of angling his body to drive the QB, then it would be a legit hit.
You drive a QB into the ground by slamming him, not from completing a tackle where your body weight continues to move in the direction you are heading.
It shouldn't be incumbent on tacklers to start to reposition themselves mid-tackle.
...
But just on your explanation, the defender does exactly what you say he shouldn't. He rolls his shoulder mid-tackle to change his direction in which he would have taken the QB to ground if he hadn't.
Is being completed overlegislated with rules. My biggest complaint with the games in the recent years has been the number of flags and sheer number of stoppages/ overexplanations. I'm all for player safety but you have to let them play football.
basically some type of hit where the QB is lifted off the ground and pile-driven back into the turf which should not typically be necessary when tackling.
Since the defender literally has knees on the ground while he is bringing down the QB, I don’t see any way he lifted the guy up and drove him down.
I realize others see it different but looks like a good hard hit when the QB was exposed...that’s all.
They want the defender to roll not drive the qb into the turf ie Aaron Rodgers. That is what they are teaching now. The defender clearly tried and succeeded in landing and driving his shoulder into the qbs chest. This hit could have been easily avoided if he maintained his initial angle on the hit. Call it a bad call whatever you want but isn’t he new nfl this was the correct call
I'm sorry, but I disagree strongly with this opinion. So now we expect our defenders to rap them up and spin the QB's to the ground to lay them down gently. Their job is to get the QB's on the ground and using their body weight to do that is the best way..for them. What happens when the defender tries to spin and lay the QB down and the QB breaks the arm tackle to keep the play alive? Will the refs blow it dead as in the grasp? You cannot take physicality out of the NFL. I get protecting head injuries, but now we are protecting QB's from bruised ribs? GTFO.
wrap him up and drive backwards. That's tackling 101.
Sacks are only suppose to be made with arm tackles now?
If this is a penalty then a sack should be awarded the second a QB gets mildly wrapped up by a defender.
It's hard enough to tackle a mobile QB in this league, now the league is asking defenders to tackle with compassion as well?
The tackle itself doesn't look like a penalty at all Â
What was called was probably the way he shifted his body AFTER he had already wrapped up and the QB was going to the ground. It doesn't look that bad and I don't think should be called a penalty, but in the preseason they call more things tightly to emphasize them. Since these games are glorified practices anyway, I don't have a problem with that.
Caveat - I also only saw the play only in slow motion which always allows for greater dissection of every part of the tackle. In the regular season I think you let that one go and remind the player the next one is getting called.
... then when a running back "trucks" a defensive back, THAT should ALSO be a penalty. ESPECIALLY when the RB lowers his shoulder and drives the DB (who is going backward) into the ground.
(See how ridiculous?)
Remember when Kiwinuka didn't drive Vince Young into the ground? Â
wrap him up and drive backwards. That's tackling 101.
Sacks are only suppose to be made with arm tackles now?
If this is a penalty then a sack should be awarded the second a QB gets mildly wrapped up by a defender.
It's hard enough to tackle a mobile QB in this league, now the league is asking defenders to tackle with compassion as well?
Agree one hundred percent. That looked like a text book form tackle. Defender gets fit into the hitting position, puts the shoulder pad on the hip pad of the ball carrier, wraps and drives ball carrier to the ground.
Clean hit all the way. No one who watches, had played or coached football can think that is a penalty. I thought it was nuts that Zimmer was quoted in the article stating he calmed down and now thinks it is a penalty. He has to be a trying to kiss the league's ass.
Football can be made safer, but that was a form tackle. As far as the Rodgers rule, he is a whiny bitch with his quotes mentioned in the article as well. Rodgers is mobile and if defenders let up on tackling him whether he is trying to throw or not, they run the risk of him evading and scampering for a big game.
Football truly is going down the tubes. I am alk talk though, because I still watch.
He clearly left his feet at the end of the tackle Â
and it was completely unnecessary. You can disagree with the rules, but by definition that was a penalty. Even the Viking coach admitted it after rewatching it.
They want the defender to roll not drive the qb into the turf ie Aaron Rodgers. That is what they are teaching now. The defender clearly tried and succeeded in landing and driving his shoulder into the qbs chest. This hit could have been easily avoided if he maintained his initial angle on the hit. Call it a bad call whatever you want but isn’t he new nfl this was the correct call
They want the defender to roll not drive the qb into the turf ie Aaron Rodgers. That is what they are teaching now. The defender clearly tried and succeeded in landing and driving his shoulder into the qbs chest. This hit could have been easily avoided if he maintained his initial angle on the hit. Call it a bad call whatever you want but isn’t he new nfl this was the correct call
Lol, there's always that one guy.
LOL, there is more than one guy.
Re-watch the tape. The QB is going down. The tackler is on his knees. He then lifts himself off his knees so he can drive more of his weight into the QB. Is it a blatant example? No, and it may be a little ticky tack. But it is the rule.
This is being pushed by coaches Robert Saleh (49ers), Dan Quinn (Falcons) and Pete Carroll (Seahawks...both Saleh and Quinn have Seahawk connections, and Pete Carrol has been major factor in promoting Rugby Tackling).
Urban Myer has had great success at Ohio State using this style of tackling as well, and it seems to be effective with concussions, as both the Seahawks and Falcons had only 4 concussions last year (vs the league average of 6).
If you look at old football films, lead with the shoulder and wrap up tackles were the proper way to play defense, we've only seen leading with the head since the 60's (and even more since ESPN and cable came along). Players increased speed and size made collisions more violent, which makes for great TV, but lead to more and more injuries.
I can't fault the NFL for trying to keep their stars on the field, and it is refreshing to see a trend to better tackling, something that has been missing in the modern game.
But when I saw it from the perspective of directly behind the qb, you can see the tackler hit the ground with his knees, and then get leverage and he shoulders the QB into the ground....this is not a RB, or WR, or TE, this is a QB, and they are going to protect a QB on that kind of tackle everytime....
I think it was last year, when OV sacked Wentz, the flag came out because he drove Wentz into the ground, and he had to leave the game...BBI was in an uproar, how could they call that? Because we are Giant fans we saw nothing Wrong...if that same Tackle happened to Eli, BBI would want the tackler's head on a stick....
Several posters have seen this on this thread, and there is no agreement.....just like there will be no agreement on what is a fumble and what is a catch during the season....
Why not get it over with and just attach the ... Â
Re-watch the tape. The QB is going down. The tackler is on his knees. He then lifts himself off his knees so he can drive more of his weight into the QB. Is it a blatant example? No, and it may be a little ticky tack. But it is the rule.
This is what I see. The shift the defender made during mid-tackle was so that he was far more certain to bring down the QB. Without that mid-tackle adjust, he had no way to ensure the QB goes down and it was certainly possible the QB spins out. I've seen that happen pretty often.
RE: RE: RE: This wasn’t a bad call by any stretch Â
Re-watch the tape. The QB is going down. The tackler is on his knees. He then lifts himself off his knees so he can drive more of his weight into the QB. Is it a blatant example? No, and it may be a little ticky tack. But it is the rule.
This is what I see. The shift the defender made during mid-tackle was so that he was far more certain to bring down the QB. Without that mid-tackle adjust, he had no way to ensure the QB goes down and it was certainly possible the QB spins out. I've seen that happen pretty often.
The Qb was wrapped up and his ass was 6 inches of the ground when the tackler started to rise from his knees. There was no way he could escape. Even if there was, that is not an excuse for committing a foul. Again, I said it was a ticky tack call but it was a foul.
Looks to me like he gave the QB a little extra business there at the end.
If that happened to Eli Manning, I'd think it was excessive.
The rule isn't asking anyone to defy physics, it's saying once you have the guy wrapped and he's on his way down, don't keep driving or re-up and throw more into him.
It's a unique situation for the QB, the shoulder pads are usually adjusted to allow for more flexibility and I think that's why you see more collar bone, shoulder, neck issues from getting smacked against the turf.
NFL is going to make every effort to appear to be proactive against CTE. So they put in stupid rules to make it look like they are doing something.
Meanwhile, when you look at who's suffering from CTE, its far and away linemen. No QBs, and no defensman has been concussed while making a sack.
So they are making a stupid rule that suites aopearances but has no impact on the problem they hope to resolve.
"NFL" now means the game is Not For Long
I don't think this rule is strictly about CTE but more of general safety.
Quote:
No QBs, and no defensman has been concussed while making a sack.
Not sure about any sackers getting concussions, though I bet some have, but QBs have certainly received concussions. Big Ben would certainly disagree with you. He was concussed in training camp a week ago while making a pass. Granted he was hit while throwing the ball and not sacked but that argument would be quibbling.
As to this "stupid rule" I can't believe anyone would not consider a player intentionally driving his full body weight onto a QB an unnecessary safety risk. You can say the call was bad but not the rule. It's very much like a bad face masking flag. Bad call, good rule.
The NFL is getting very close to being unwatchable... Â
The defense has been neutered, the cap economics neutralize long term success and depth, Thursday night football is a colossal failure (from a quality standpoint), MNF has lost its luster, the NFLPA is one of the worst unions in the history of the planet, politics are too pervasive, and Goodell is the worst face of the league ever.
Looks like a good clean hit. But because the QB was caught so flat footed the ref overreached with his decision imv. Defender does put a little extra “oomph” into once the QB was basically down but not to the point of drawing a penalty.
If every aspect of a tackle is going to be micromanaged it is yet another impending fail waiting to happen.
You drive a QB into the ground by slamming him, not from completing a tackle where your body weight continues to move in the direction you are heading.
It shouldn't be incumbent on tacklers to start to reposition themselves mid-tackle.
The rules are simply madness.
My view is that is absolutely a penalty. The moment the Viking rolls his shoulder driving the QB into the ground is the source of the penalty. If the Viking just continues to run through and sack the QB without the extra effort of angling his body to drive the QB, then it would be a legit hit.
...
You drive a QB into the ground by slamming him, not from completing a tackle where your body weight continues to move in the direction you are heading.
It shouldn't be incumbent on tacklers to start to reposition themselves mid-tackle.
...
But just on your explanation, the defender does exactly what you say he shouldn't. He rolls his shoulder mid-tackle to change his direction in which he would have taken the QB to ground if he hadn't.
Since the defender literally has knees on the ground while he is bringing down the QB, I don’t see any way he lifted the guy up and drove him down.
I realize others see it different but looks like a good hard hit when the QB was exposed...that’s all.
Link - ( New Window )
Same here.
I'm sorry, but I disagree strongly with this opinion. So now we expect our defenders to rap them up and spin the QB's to the ground to lay them down gently. Their job is to get the QB's on the ground and using their body weight to do that is the best way..for them. What happens when the defender tries to spin and lay the QB down and the QB breaks the arm tackle to keep the play alive? Will the refs blow it dead as in the grasp? You cannot take physicality out of the NFL. I get protecting head injuries, but now we are protecting QB's from bruised ribs? GTFO.
Sacks are only suppose to be made with arm tackles now?
If this is a penalty then a sack should be awarded the second a QB gets mildly wrapped up by a defender.
It's hard enough to tackle a mobile QB in this league, now the league is asking defenders to tackle with compassion as well?
Caveat - I also only saw the play only in slow motion which always allows for greater dissection of every part of the tackle. In the regular season I think you let that one go and remind the player the next one is getting called.
(See how ridiculous?)
Sacks are only suppose to be made with arm tackles now?
If this is a penalty then a sack should be awarded the second a QB gets mildly wrapped up by a defender.
It's hard enough to tackle a mobile QB in this league, now the league is asking defenders to tackle with compassion as well?
Agree one hundred percent. That looked like a text book form tackle. Defender gets fit into the hitting position, puts the shoulder pad on the hip pad of the ball carrier, wraps and drives ball carrier to the ground.
Clean hit all the way. No one who watches, had played or coached football can think that is a penalty. I thought it was nuts that Zimmer was quoted in the article stating he calmed down and now thinks it is a penalty. He has to be a trying to kiss the league's ass.
Football can be made safer, but that was a form tackle. As far as the Rodgers rule, he is a whiny bitch with his quotes mentioned in the article as well. Rodgers is mobile and if defenders let up on tackling him whether he is trying to throw or not, they run the risk of him evading and scampering for a big game.
Football truly is going down the tubes. I am alk talk though, because I still watch.
Lose-lose.
Lol, there's always that one guy.
Quote:
They want the defender to roll not drive the qb into the turf ie Aaron Rodgers. That is what they are teaching now. The defender clearly tried and succeeded in landing and driving his shoulder into the qbs chest. This hit could have been easily avoided if he maintained his initial angle on the hit. Call it a bad call whatever you want but isn’t he new nfl this was the correct call
Lol, there's always that one guy.
LOL, there is more than one guy.
Re-watch the tape. The QB is going down. The tackler is on his knees. He then lifts himself off his knees so he can drive more of his weight into the QB. Is it a blatant example? No, and it may be a little ticky tack. But it is the rule.
Robert Saleh thinks rugby-style tackling technique gives 49ers advantage with new helmet rule
This is being pushed by coaches Robert Saleh (49ers), Dan Quinn (Falcons) and Pete Carroll (Seahawks...both Saleh and Quinn have Seahawk connections, and Pete Carrol has been major factor in promoting Rugby Tackling).
Urban Myer has had great success at Ohio State using this style of tackling as well, and it seems to be effective with concussions, as both the Seahawks and Falcons had only 4 concussions last year (vs the league average of 6).
If you look at old football films, lead with the shoulder and wrap up tackles were the proper way to play defense, we've only seen leading with the head since the 60's (and even more since ESPN and cable came along). Players increased speed and size made collisions more violent, which makes for great TV, but lead to more and more injuries.
I can't fault the NFL for trying to keep their stars on the field, and it is refreshing to see a trend to better tackling, something that has been missing in the modern game.
But when I saw it from the perspective of directly behind the qb, you can see the tackler hit the ground with his knees, and then get leverage and he shoulders the QB into the ground....this is not a RB, or WR, or TE, this is a QB, and they are going to protect a QB on that kind of tackle everytime....
I think it was last year, when OV sacked Wentz, the flag came out because he drove Wentz into the ground, and he had to leave the game...BBI was in an uproar, how could they call that? Because we are Giant fans we saw nothing Wrong...if that same Tackle happened to Eli, BBI would want the tackler's head on a stick....
Several posters have seen this on this thread, and there is no agreement.....just like there will be no agreement on what is a fumble and what is a catch during the season....
Re-watch the tape. The QB is going down. The tackler is on his knees. He then lifts himself off his knees so he can drive more of his weight into the QB. Is it a blatant example? No, and it may be a little ticky tack. But it is the rule.
This is what I see. The shift the defender made during mid-tackle was so that he was far more certain to bring down the QB. Without that mid-tackle adjust, he had no way to ensure the QB goes down and it was certainly possible the QB spins out. I've seen that happen pretty often.
Quote:
Re-watch the tape. The QB is going down. The tackler is on his knees. He then lifts himself off his knees so he can drive more of his weight into the QB. Is it a blatant example? No, and it may be a little ticky tack. But it is the rule.
This is what I see. The shift the defender made during mid-tackle was so that he was far more certain to bring down the QB. Without that mid-tackle adjust, he had no way to ensure the QB goes down and it was certainly possible the QB spins out. I've seen that happen pretty often.
The Qb was wrapped up and his ass was 6 inches of the ground when the tackler started to rise from his knees. There was no way he could escape. Even if there was, that is not an excuse for committing a foul. Again, I said it was a ticky tack call but it was a foul.
If that happened to Eli Manning, I'd think it was excessive.
The rule isn't asking anyone to defy physics, it's saying once you have the guy wrapped and he's on his way down, don't keep driving or re-up and throw more into him.
It's a unique situation for the QB, the shoulder pads are usually adjusted to allow for more flexibility and I think that's why you see more collar bone, shoulder, neck issues from getting smacked against the turf.
Meanwhile, when you look at who's suffering from CTE, its far and away linemen. No QBs, and no defensman has been concussed while making a sack.
So they are making a stupid rule that suites aopearances but has no impact on the problem they hope to resolve.
"NFL" now means the game is Not For Long
Meanwhile, when you look at who's suffering from CTE, its far and away linemen. No QBs, and no defensman has been concussed while making a sack.
So they are making a stupid rule that suites aopearances but has no impact on the problem they hope to resolve.
"NFL" now means the game is Not For Long
I don't think this rule is strictly about CTE but more of general safety.
As to this "stupid rule" I can't believe anyone would not consider a player intentionally driving his full body weight onto a QB an unnecessary safety risk. You can say the call was bad but not the rule. It's very much like a bad face masking flag. Bad call, good rule.
Antwione Williams was basically penalized for playing football.