RBs cannot lower their head rule?

LAKESHOW · Post #1 » by **LAKESHOW** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:38 pm

CHICAGO -- Bears running back Matt Forte called the NFL's proposed rule change that would penalize ball carriers who lower their heads to deliver a blow "absurd" in a series of messages he posted on his official Twitter account Sunday morning. The new rule would penalize a runner 15-yards if he initiates contact with the crown of his helmet outside of the tackle box. Incidental contact with the crown of the helmet would not be a penalty

"The proposed rule change for running backs might be the most absurd suggestion of a rule change I've ever heard of," Forte wrote. "In order to lower ur shoulder u obviously have to lower ur head. It's a way of protecting ur self from a tackler and a way to break tackles."

http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/ ... nge-absurd

Runningbacks are devalued every day. Not only a short lifespan as all know, but now, they cant even lower their head.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #2 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:36 pm

I posted the following yesterday on the Bears board:

BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:
Matt Forte: Rule change 'absurd'

Bears running back Matt Forte called the NFL's proposed rule change that would penalize ball carriers who lower their heads to deliver a blow "absurd" in a series of messages he posted on his official Twitter account Sunday morning.

The new rule would penalize a runner 15-yards if he initiates contact with the crown of his helmet outside of the tackle box. Incidental contact with the crown of the helmet would not be a penalty.

"The proposed rule change for running backs might be the most absurd suggestion of a rule change I've ever heard of," Forte wrote. "In order to lower ur shoulder u obviously have to lower ur head. It's a way of protecting ur self from a tackler and a way to break tackles."

Forte believes players would be unable to adjust if the new rule is put into place.

http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/ ... nge-absurd

Defensive players had to adjust when the rules limited them. I don't think that it's fair for a RB to aggressively lead with their head, while the defensive player can't do the same.

Either the NFL should take the cuffs off the defense or offensive players should stop whining when rules are put in place to even things out a little.

As I said in the post above, I believe that defensive players are at a disadvantage in today's NFL.

Higga · Post #3 » by **Higga** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:47 pm

That rule change is awful, one of if not the worst I've ever seen. What are RBs supposed to do, keep their head up high so opposing defenders can take them out? It's RB 101 to stay low, keep your head down, and power into defenders to not only gain yards but to actually keep them safe. "Running high" gets you hurt more and is also an ineffective way to maximize your runs.

and1GS · Post #4 » by **and1GS** » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:27 pm

I think this is very stupid, especially since RBs usually lower their head to protect themselves rather than use their helmet as a weapon.

Post #5 » by **ATL Boy** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:53 am

Awful rule change, pretty soon we will be playing flag football in the NFL

Tyrone Luton · Post #6 » by **Tyrone Luton** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:25 am

ONE of the worst rules

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #7 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:26 pm

The rule is basically designed to eliminate offensive players from using their heads as battering rams. It's basically the same as the rule on defensive players.

It's not fun watching the NFL when offensive players are allowed to do whatever the hell they want, but defensive players are flagged for everything in the book. This rule is making it fair for both.

In a perfect world, the NFL would drop ALL of these new rules that have been put in place the last 10 years or so. It's frustrating to watch a game where the defense is being penalized for breathing too hard on a QB or dislodging a football from a "defenseless" WR.

Post #8 » by **Worm Guts** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:30 pm

It's not about favoring the offense or defense, it's about safety. I just have a hard time figuring out how a running back can protect himself from an oncoming defender without lowering his shoulder (if you lower your shoulder your head comes with it). It sounds like it would make the game more dangerous for a running back. If they can word the rule so actually makes the game safer, I'd probably be for it.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #9 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:56 pm

Worm Guts wrote:I just have a hard time figuring out how a running back can protect himself from an oncoming defender without lowering his shoulder (if you lower your shoulder your head comes with it).

The same applies for a defender going in for a tackle while lowering his shoulder. It also somewhat applies when a 300 lb D-Lineman attempts to bat down a QB's pass, but his momentum forces his hands to land on the QB's helmet or his body to land on the QB as he's coming down.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #10 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:33 pm

isn't getting your pads under the other guy's pads fundamental? I'm not sure how this is going to play out; seems hard to enforce this rule w/o re-writing the whole concept of defense/ball-carrier contact.

Post #11 » by **Icness** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:33 pm

Legarrette Blount and John Kuhn just lost the last possible ability to top 2 yards per carry. Brandon Jacobs might as well start filing for unemployment.

I get the safety issue here but the problem is that in order to hit someone with your shoulder when you're running forward you have to lower your head too. I don't see how it really helps. It seems like the issue was with guys like Blount who deliberately lowered their heads to attack a defender, not guys reacting to about to be hit.

Post #12 » by **jr lucosa** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:32 pm

As an NFL fan I hate the rule, but at the same time there are tons of videos on youtube of little kids running into each other head first in drills and games, some leading to bad injuries, and ESPN bringing it to light.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dx1gZPhJAo[/youtube]

On top of that you have the President of the US who has come out and said that youth football isn't safe and has seemlingly put some pressure on the NFL to make changes

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2013/01/30/Obama-HS-Sports

In an interview with the left-leaning New Republic that was published this weekend, Obama said: "I'm a big football fan, but I have to tell you if I had a son, I'd have to think long and hard before I let him play football."

He suggested changes would be coming to the NFL to reduce some of the sport's "violence."

Post #13 » by **NO-KG-AI** » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:23 pm

It doesn't apply inside of the tackle box. If you are in the open field 1 on 1, you shouldn't be leading with your head like a missile anyway... you're going to take someone out, and not get any further.

It's not that bad if called correctly, just a lot of times guys are going to get tripped up, and too many times incidental contact is going to get flagged.

Blkbrd671 · Post #14 » by **Blkbrd671** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:08 am

NO-KG-AI wrote:It doesn't apply inside of the tackle box. If you are in the open field 1 on 1, you shouldn't be leading with your head like a missile anyway... you're going to take someone out, and not get any further.

It's not that bad if called correctly, just a lot of times guys are going to get tripped up, and too many times incidental contact is going to get flagged.

i think its a good rule for outside the tackle box, going to be interesting though when its 3rd or 4th down and they need that extra yard to get the first, how refs gpoing to call it

NeedsMoreCheese · Post #15 » by **NeedsMoreCheese** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:17 am

Honestly I'd like to see the video they talked about to show the difference between whats legal and whats not as far as using the head since that apparently made all the difference in them voting right away as opposed to delaying it.
Also the big thing about this rule seems to be how its officiated and the intricacies. The casual NFL fan is going to be confused as hell just like they are with helmet to helmet. As far as i know helmet to helmet itself is still not an illegal hit (though most fans seem to think it is), it depends on the situation on the field.

LAKESHOW · Post #16 » by **LAKESHOW** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:38 pm

Trent Richardson told The (Cleveland) Plain Dealer on Wednesday that he feels like it's his fault that running backs will now be penalized for using the crown of their helmets to make forcible contact with a defender outside the tackle box.
A video of Richardson knocking off Eagles safety Kurt Coleman's helmet was used as an example of plays the league wanted to penalize during the NFL owners meetings in Phoenix. The rule change passed 31-1, with the Cincinnati Bengals the only team to vote against it.
"I feel like I made it bad for all the backs," Richardson told the newspaper. "I feel like it's my fault."
He said people are starting to name the rule after him.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/90785 ... elmet-rule

MVP2110 · Post #17 » by **MVP2110** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:03 pm

There is a point of safety and a point of over the top. The League has gone voer the top for awhile now

OlDirtMcBert · Post #18 » by **OlDirtMcBert** » Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:30 pm

Higga wrote:That rule change is awful, one of if not the worst I've ever seen. What are RBs supposed to do, keep their head up high so opposing defenders can take them out? It's RB 101 to stay low, keep your head down, and power into defenders to not only gain yards but to actually keep them safe. "Running high" gets you hurt more and is also an ineffective way to maximize your runs.

Total overreaction. I expect this to be called very few times. It's there as evidence for future reference in lawsuits. It'll only be called when guys pull a Trent Richardson or Earl Campbell and basically stutter step into a full head butt with the crown of their helmets into the defender. In those cases, it should be a penalty. It's a common sense call, so I think it's basically never going to be called. These rules are almost all geared toward getting players to see what they hit. It's not a bad policy. Heads up, see what you hit.