Potential new NFL rules
- Thread starter DJnVa
- Start date
I hate penalizing the hip drop in that manner. That seems destined to be something that's enforced sporadically and unfairly.
How about we start to take concussions actually seriously, like giving fines and suspensions out to whatever coaches /doctors allowed TJ Watt back on the field and gave him smelling salts in the Pats game after he got kicked in the chin and switched to a shaded visor? Or how Mahomes wasn't even evaluated until multiple plays after his helmet broke on a helmet to helmet collision? Or myriad other examples.
How about we start to take concussions actually seriously, like giving fines and suspensions out to whatever coaches /doctors allowed TJ Watt back on the field and gave him smelling salts in the Pats game after he got kicked in the chin and switched to a shaded visor? Or how Mahomes wasn't even evaluated until multiple plays after his helmet broke on a helmet to helmet collision? Or myriad other examples.
This is the old XFL kickoff rule, which the now-UFL is not using in 2024. (Basically sounds like the USFL guys hated it and this was part of the compromise for the merger.) Here's the two touchdowns from 2020:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eChnUrXXV9s
I like it well enough -- it's definitely not boring -- but it does sort of violate some basic tenants of the game (players starting on opposite sides of the football) and it still leaves the problem of what to do with the onside kick.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eChnUrXXV9s
I like it well enough -- it's definitely not boring -- but it does sort of violate some basic tenants of the game (players starting on opposite sides of the football) and it still leaves the problem of what to do with the onside kick.
It starts and ends with Tua being mostly dead in a ballgame.
Yes, we need heavy fines to teams that allow this crap. And a serious "spotter".
So a returner can field a kick 8 yards deep in the end zone, and the kicking team will be ~70 yards away when he starts his return? Is that what they're proposing?
Edit: If what AF posted is the proposal then my question is moo. That looks almost as dumb.
Edit: If what AF posted is the proposal then my question is moo. That looks almost as dumb.
Cam was pretty good on this a while back:
View: https://twitter.com/4thand1show/status/1732547095125520668?s=46&t=4DK5sD-8gsSKFExcsnEJqg
I've never played football so I'm ignorant here, but the hip drop tackle seems like, at times, the only way to bring a guy down from behind. Aren't you taught to wrap up and drop, pulling a guy to the ground, especially if he's bigger and stronger than you? I thought that was pretty normal.
We don't want defenders tackling guys up high due to concussion issues. We don't want them diving at guys' knees. We have about a 2 foot zone where they're allowed to hit, but if you're smaller than the ballcarrier, just trying to launch yourself like a missile at him isn't likely to provide a good outcome. Grab hold, drop, drag him down. I thought that was how it's supposed to be done.
Someone please correct me.
We don't want defenders tackling guys up high due to concussion issues. We don't want them diving at guys' knees. We have about a 2 foot zone where they're allowed to hit, but if you're smaller than the ballcarrier, just trying to launch yourself like a missile at him isn't likely to provide a good outcome. Grab hold, drop, drag him down. I thought that was how it's supposed to be done.
Someone please correct me.
If they could somehow refine the hip-drop rule so that it only included those tackles where the runner's leg is under the tackler's body, it *might* achieve some worthy goal. I doubt they can do that, though. They get horse-collars mostly right, but that's pretty easy.
Let's just make it harder for defensive players to bring down world-class athletes. We have to accept that the game has inherent risks. They have all these rules to protect the QBs and they are still dropping like flies.
If they eliminate or try to enforce a ban on hip drop tackles, we'll be looking at 50-40 scores soon.
You can't go high on a receiver, you can't go low or high on a QB, you can't lead with your helmet ever,
If this rule happens, you can't drop your hips, so what, if a guy gets by you and you try to tackle him, you now have to jump on top of him and hope he doesn't have the strength to just carry you the length of the field?
Make it make sense. Now, we're making the defender decide what the runner will do when they get hit, out of fear they may end up on top of the runners legs?
It's football folks, injuries are part of it.
You guys are crazy. Those tackles are crazy dangerous. And they're fairly rare, it's going to have zero effect on scoring.
I'm with you. Eliminating the horse collar worked great. Not sure what the issue is here.
Seems like a PR win for the league. Fake press release/league spokesperson quote: "We proposed eliminating a play/tackling technique that our research determined was unsafe and the proposal was shot down by the players."
The horse collar seems a lot easier to identify and there's less gray area. This one would rely a lot of the refs' judgment. The more subjective rules there are in football the worse it'll be. There are enough issues with refs being inconsistent already.
That horse left the barn, won the Kentucky Derby, and sired several generations of thoroughbreds.
They even have a slick website that celebrates the history of the annual new complications:
https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/evolution-of-the-nfl-rules/
The OP left out some other proposals:
The proposed hip drop tackle ban is reactionary nonsense, because of a handful of semi-freakish injuries. And will be an enforcement cluster fuck if passed. The kickoff proposal I’m mostly meh about. They’ve already legislated out the most exciting play in the sport, so may as well try something else I guess.
I feel like we need a post-career Cam thread. That dude is so goddamn good at this. He's better than 90% of the media at talking the sport, and his football mind is incredible. I was a HUGE Cam guy at Auburn and was so excited to see him on the Pats, even if it didn't go super well (also that he and Edelman clearly have huge respect for each other makes me love Cam more).
How do you tackle a guy from behind without dropping your legs and dragging them down, and landing on their legs? How do you differentiate between the "Gator roll", the "hawk tackle" and the hip drop tackle in real time with any consistency?
I'll hang up and listen.
I'll hang up and listen.
I think the in-motion crackback block prohibition is needed much more than the hip drop tackle prohibition. Way too easy to injure a guy on a play like that. If you can't block the guy like a normal block, then don't put guys in a position to block.
They probably should ban all cut blocking. Of course if they ban all cut blocking, there goes the Brotherly Shove. Surprised someone pissed at that play hasn't suggested that one yet.
They probably should ban all cut blocking. Of course if they ban all cut blocking, there goes the Brotherly Shove. Surprised someone pissed at that play hasn't suggested that one yet.
Owners unanimously voted to ban the hip-drop tackle.
This is going to be a clusterfuck.
View: https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1772282915725983997?s=20
This is going to be a clusterfuck.
View: https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1772282915725983997?s=20
View: https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/1772292176904437981
Replay assistant can overturn roughing called for hits to head if no contact with head, out of the pocket. Same for intentional grounding, pocket, LOS, etc.
Subjective calls still not reviewable
Replay assistant can overturn roughing called for hits to head if no contact with head, out of the pocket. Same for intentional grounding, pocket, LOS, etc.
Subjective calls still not reviewable
Didn't there used to be a rule on the books -- and I'm talking many, many years ago, -- that prevented offensive players from pushing the ball-carrier forward. Sure, the Brotherly Shove is a big deal now, but the rugby scrum plays, especially ones where an offensive lineman comes blasting into the back of a pileup, seems against the spirit of the rules.
Seems like the league is taking a very bad few years of officiating seriously. Which I guess is a positive. I still think the biggest problem with the replay officials is a lack of transparency. Ever since the Pats got Riveron'd in SB LII, I have had zero faith that "calls upstairs" are being done on the up and up. And I think other teams should be worried about that, too.
As for the Brotherly Shove, I actually wonder whether it's already mostly RIP because the Eagles were the best at it by some margin and Jason Kelce retired.
I’ve generally not been too reactionary about safety rule changes, because they seem to get integrated fairly quickly into the game, and I don’t end up noticing most of them(with roughing the QB being a big exception), but this one feels different. It’s almost to the point where if a defender is behind a ball carrier, there’s barely a legal way to tackle them anymore. I think it’s going to be a disaster trying to enforce this, without all kinds of game altering over calling of it.
A couple additional thoughts on hip-drop:
- There are a lot of articles parroting the NFL's note that a hip drop tackle is 20-25x more likely to cause injury than a "normal" tackle. Which, of course, sounds pretty bad. But, it says here that this is based on 15 injuries on 230 cases where a hop drop tackle was used in the 22-23 season: https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/nfl-reportedly-bans-hip-drop-tackle-over-objection-from-nflpa
- So, 1. that's only 15 injuries, with no note on the severity and 2. that's a pretty small number of tackles that met the criteria.
- This national rugby league video explains what is and isn't a hip drop tackle (I assume the NFL criteria will be similar). When I watch the tackles in the second half of the video (that AREN'T hop-drop) I have a hard time imagining being able to correctly officiate the difference in real time. View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KJ9mCbS3rU&ab_channel=NRL-NationalRugbyLeague
- I think that based on the above, there seems to be a lot more risk of false positives here -- misclassifying a tackle that's close to a hip drop but not actually a violation -- than there is real risk of injury considering the low prevalence of such tackles. I can definitely see them calling a couple of these in preseason and then forgetting about it until some late-season game when they call something borderline. Or, they call something a penalty that causes an injury but isn't actually a hip-drop by the rules.
The NFL is one more rule change away from banning tackling.
Banning the hip drop is going to be impossible to officiate. And it makes the defenders job's impossible, too. The hip drop tackle isn't a maneuver, it's gravity.
So this will just make the refs have a harder time officiating and it will be harder for the the players to play. Good job NFL, that's high quietly work.
Banning the hip drop is going to be impossible to officiate. And it makes the defenders job's impossible, too. The hip drop tackle isn't a maneuver, it's gravity.
So this will just make the refs have a harder time officiating and it will be harder for the the players to play. Good job NFL, that's high quietly work.
Let’s say Derrick Henry breaks into the defensive backfield. A safety runs him down from behind and grabs him around the waist.
Now what is the safety supposed to do? Henry is much bigger and stronger. What options does the safety have besides dropping to the ground in hopes of pulling Henry down?
Now what is the safety supposed to do? Henry is much bigger and stronger. What options does the safety have besides dropping to the ground in hopes of pulling Henry down?
That's what I was asking above. Basically, the defender has to jump on his back and slow him down enough until his teammates show up.
It's not much different than a guy running down the sidelines. Even a safety running at an angle from slightly behind literally has no option on how to tackle, except try for a big hit.
We were taught "wrap up and bring the guy to the ground." We were also taught don't lead with your helmet, don't horse collar, no tripping, etc.
Now, you can't wrap up because if you wrap up, the only way to bring someone down is by dropping your hips and dragging them down.
I heard today on the radio that the reality is this is going to lead to more fines, and not more penalties. I have a feeling we're only going to see flags if someone actually gets hurt.
It's all fucking stupid.
Yeah, and even if there's a way they could indeed bring him down without a hip drop, every trailing defender will have that possibility on his mind, which already alters a lot of plays. The argument that a hip drop tacklle happens on average once a game is ridiculous precisely for that reason. The impact will be felt pretty much every time an offensive player has the ball with an open field.
Maybe they'll tell defenders in this situation that they have to dive for the runner's feet. But ok, so now you have 200 pound defenders launching themselves at ballcarriers' feet and ankles. How's that not going to end up with a bunch of injuries too?
I heard a few times on the radio yesterday that this won’t be enforced via flags but rather via fines after the game.
edit:
Slight clarification. According to this article on NFL.com we can “expect more fines than flags in the first season…”
NFL.com article
Wording of the rule:
I do think some are over reacting. Players can still wrap up and don't need to just jump on their back. (b) is the key part of what makes it a hip-drop.
Be interesting if the NFL does enforce it more with fines than flags. I do think live it may be challenging to call correctly on a consistent basis.
I do think some are over reacting. Players can still wrap up and don't need to just jump on their back. (b) is the key part of what makes it a hip-drop.
The problem is that when you grab a guy around the waist from behind, everyone is in motion, and things are happening fast. You grab and drop to the ground, and sometimes it's going to trap the runner's legs. Often the angle you take to bring a guy down is going to cause your own body to swivel a little - again, guys are running fast and laws of physics are what they are.
Belichick got out just in time.
I can't believe that's now an NFL rule. Unbelievable. Not necessarily complaining; just pretty surreal.
One thing that came up in the XFL Championship: after a two-point conversion, DC incurred an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. That backed up the kicker 15 yards but not the target zone, which sort of seemed to me to be a double penalty for one infraction. Then the kicker -- actually the now-Packers punter Dan Whelan -- missed the target zone for another 15-yard penalty. Arlington ended up starting with the ball on I believe the plus 30 yard line. (edit: the NFL verbiage confirms that only the kicker will move for penalties. Does not explicitly say what happens on a kick that falls short in that situation.)
I assume this means there will be a 4th & 15 type onside kick play. I really don't care for that, but I'm not sure I have a much better solution. What I liked about the onside kick is that it required another unit -- special teams -- to make a play. Under the 4th & 15 rule, it's just the offense while everyone else watches. I think I'd explore maybe giving the other team a 4th and inches (or 4th and 1, whatever makes the math work) play. Then they can either go for it and ice the game or punt it back.
I can't believe that's now an NFL rule. Unbelievable. Not necessarily complaining; just pretty surreal.
One thing that came up in the XFL Championship: after a two-point conversion, DC incurred an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. That backed up the kicker 15 yards but not the target zone, which sort of seemed to me to be a double penalty for one infraction. Then the kicker -- actually the now-Packers punter Dan Whelan -- missed the target zone for another 15-yard penalty. Arlington ended up starting with the ball on I believe the plus 30 yard line. (edit: the NFL verbiage confirms that only the kicker will move for penalties. Does not explicitly say what happens on a kick that falls short in that situation.)
I assume this means there will be a 4th & 15 type onside kick play. I really don't care for that, but I'm not sure I have a much better solution. What I liked about the onside kick is that it required another unit -- special teams -- to make a play. Under the 4th & 15 rule, it's just the offense while everyone else watches. I think I'd explore maybe giving the other team a 4th and inches (or 4th and 1, whatever makes the math work) play. Then they can either go for it and ice the game or punt it back.
Last edited:
