What I want to know is how is a defender supposed to adjust if a player starts to drop? I'm a qb, I have the ball, defender is about to blow me up fairly and legally in the chest and I drop, now he hits me in the head because of my reaction.
I'm sure that question has been asked hundreds of times from defenders unnecessarily flagged on plays just like that.
Nothing will change as long as the helicopter mom mentality runs the NFL. The BS simply flows downstream to the college game. I wouldn't be surprised to see a concerted effort within the next few years to ban football entirely. The groundwork is already being laid with the media trying to link every football player death to concussions.. There was an enormous amount of howling over Junior Seau's suicide being caused by head injuries, but nary a peep from the same people when the autopsy showed no evidence to support it.
I suspect in the near future we're going to see something done about helmets again. Whether it's padded, or designed in some fashion similiar to shoulder pads, it'll be an improvement on how it absorbs impact. (think NASCAR and improvements in the wall structures) Will it look as good? No. But, that's something people will just have to get over. With that improvement, assuming it happens, I suspect we won't see them relax the rules. At this rate I'm wondering how long it'll be before we see some touch rule instituted. Imagine some type of contact rule like we see in spring scrimmages.
If hard hits are here to stay, then better protection via technology advancement is essential to safeguard players on the field. On the contrary, if rugby type blocking and tackling would take precedence, then lesser focus would be required on building an armor truck on on a football player. Football is a gladiator sport: the strongest, fastest, biggest will survive. If the humanitarian spirit gets kindled into the "game in action" by helicopter moms, lawsuits, etc then some aspects of the game could change?
The game has already changed. The NFL has effectively killed kickoffs by moving the spot up to the 35. As a result, touchbacks have skyrocketed from 16.4% the year before the rule to 47.4% through the early part of the 2012 season. So half of all kickoffs don't even get returned anymore at the pro level. The NCAA has already considered eliminating kickoffs entirely. And honestly, if you're going to water it down to that extent in the pros, why take half measures by playing around with the kickoff spot?
you make a good point, didn't realize re: some rules already changing for player protection. I think the biggest sticky point is the hard hits WRs and QBs take from their blind side. You are focused to deliver a throw or receive and have to be incredibly good with reflexes to complete the play and avoid the hit....at that point you are basically almost a sitting duck. Those are the most dangerous hits IMHO. Dunno what can be done to change the rule or gear to help out there without diluting the game too much.
The thing that gets me, and goes unmentioned in all of these conversations by those trying to protect players, is most of the injuries could be avoided if kids were taught differently at a lower level. I suspect if there was an age limit for kids to play football and their "eligibility" started when they were under a coach that knew what they were doing a lot of what we see today would be avoided. Where do kids learn to lead with their helmet? The vast majority of the "major injuries" happen when someone is tackling and doing so with very poor technique. I'm considering football and youth sports under the veil of a utopia. It'll never happen. ____________________________________________________________________________ On this subject, this a paragraph from the fourth part of a four part series on this subject: Here's the link to part four: Here's the link to the entire series:
I wish I could find it but I read an article a number of years ago contrasting and comparing injuries and the style of play between the leather helmet era and the hard helmet/facemask era. The two things that stick with me are that the hard helmet prevented one of the worst injuries in football--guys could have their skull crushed when heavy bodies fell on them. Hard hats greatly reduced the concussions versus leather padding-only helmets. But serious concussions increased because they came from hard helmet hits instead of knees, elbow, or the ground. Paralyzing neck injuries greatly increased with the plastic helmets with facemasks. In the leather helmet era nobody lead with their head on a tackle. They tried to hit with the shoulder pads and protect their heads. With facemasks and hard hats players began keeping their head up and hitting with their faces behind that mask or lower their heads and hitting with the top of the helmet. The spearing foul came out soon after the hard hats. Ironically the worst injuries usually came from the hitter breaking his own neck. Ironically, if it wasn't for preventing so many broken noses and skull fractures, football might be safer from concussions and paralyzing spinal injuries if they dropped a lot of the heavy plastic armor and played it with simple padding. Or in shorts and jerseys like rugby where they tackle very solidly but don't try to absolutely clobber the opponent (and themselves) in the process. Have you ever watched a European see his first american football game? They roll on the floor laughing. To them it looks like a huge wrestling brawl with fast guys running around laying the wood on each other for 10 or 12 seconds. Then everyone stops and calmly walks back to the line, taking up 30 seconds. And then they start fighting like the WWF again for ten seconds and stop and stroll again. It's the damnedest staged vicious combat calling itself a ball game that they ever heard of.
Nice read, Red. I'm sure purists would argue that a return to "less protective" pads and the corresponding rule changes that would bring might improve the game. It would certainly make the emphasis on defense return to proper tackling techniques as opposed to head-hunting. I can't see it happening though, ironically for financial reasons. Let's say UnderArmour or Nike came out with a line of padded clothing that could replace plastic pads, and the helmet companies developed a corresponding facemask-less helmet. Schools aren't going to voluntarily switch to them while their opponents continue to wear the current style. It would take mandates from the NCAA or the high school governing bodies at the state level to order everyone to switch at once. Then it becomes a financial burden. Let's say the LHSAA mandated a switch to this hypothetical equipment beginning this fall. How many schools could afford to supply their whole team at once. And could the equipment companies be counted on to produce that much equipment that quickly?
