77 replies to this topic

[DrDareustein]

Good-bye NFL. Any more rule changes like this, and Im done with this league. I'll go watch ballet.

http://www.giants.co...c8-b37cd5226de9

Quote

“We had a lot of discussions about whether we should eliminate it and if we did what we could do in its place,” he said. “There’s no consensus on it right now, but I could see the day in the future where that play could be taken out of the game.

“You see it evolving toward that."

Edited by DrDareustein, 16 April 2012 - 06:25 PM.

[NoSaint]

The kickoff means that much to you?

[DrDareustein]

NoSaint, on 16 April 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

The kickoff means that much to you?

Slippery slope. Next it will be Madden's rule change that QBs get treated like Punters and you cant even touch them from the moment the ball leaves their hand.

http://www.latimes.c...0,567992.column

Before you know it, defenses will only be allowed to drop everyone back to the endzone and knock down passes without hitting anyone.

[Edwards' Arm]

From the article:

*******
“One thing we did determine is that by moving the kickoff to the 35 yard-line it reduced the number of returns, but reduced the number of concussions by 40 percent,” Mara said. “So I don’t think you’ll see that rule change. The kickoff is by far the most dangerous play that we have in our game. The hits are pretty violent and they come from all different directions. There are guys running full speed, that’s the problem. That’s why we put the rule in. It shortens the field a little bit and it cuts down the number of returns.”

Some coaches – particularly those who employ the league’s best return specialists – as well as several returners voiced their displeasure after the spot of the kickoffs was moved up. They are not as vocal now.

“There was no support for moving the kickoff back to the 30 yard-line,” Mara said. “I think everybody was convinced by the statistics."
*******

[DrDareustein]

Edwards, on 16 April 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

From the article:

*******
“One thing we did determine is that by moving the kickoff to the 35 yard-line it reduced the number of returns, but reduced the number of concussions by 40 percent,” Mara said. “So I don’t think you’ll see that rule change. The kickoff is by far the most dangerous play that we have in our game. The hits are pretty violent and they come from all different directions. There are guys running full speed, that’s the problem. That’s why we put the rule in. It shortens the field a little bit and it cuts down the number of returns.”

Some coaches – particularly those who employ the league’s best return specialists – as well as several returners voiced their displeasure after the spot of the kickoffs was moved up. They are not as vocal now.

“There was no support for moving the kickoff back to the 30 yard-line,” Mara said. “I think everybody was convinced by the statistics."
*******

I think it's a huge leap in logic to conclude that the kickoff rule change was the ONLY reason that concussions dropped. Unless they are simply counting "Concussions that happen on Kickoff plays". And if that is the case, then his statement is skewed.

I guess my main beef with all this is that the NFL isnt making these changes because they really care about their players. It's making the changes to protect itself from litigation in the future.

The whole thing just sucks. We're losing our game of Football.

[bladiebla]

Edwards, on 16 April 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

From the article:

*******
"One thing we did determine is that by moving the kickoff to the 35 yard-line it reduced the number of returns, but reduced the number of concussions by 40 percent," Mara said. "So I don't think you'll see that rule change. The kickoff is by far the most dangerous play that we have in our game. The hits are pretty violent and they come from all different directions. There are guys running full speed, that's the problem. That's why we put the rule in. It shortens the field a little bit and it cuts down the number of returns."

Some coaches – particularly those who employ the league's best return specialists – as well as several returners voiced their displeasure after the spot of the kickoffs was moved up. They are not as vocal now.

"There was no support for moving the kickoff back to the 30 yard-line," Mara said. "I think everybody was convinced by the statistics."
*******

Wierd how these guys justify botched statistics... Kickoff returns were down around 50%, concussions by 40% so my math tells me the actual concusion per kickoff ratio went up, not down.

[NoSaint]

bladiebla, on 16 April 2012 - 07:07 PM, said:

Wierd how these guys justify botched statistics... Kickoff returns were down around 50%, concussions by 40% so my math tells me the actual concusion per kickoff ratio went up, not down.

Guess again. Per kickoff went down, regardless of the per return stats that you blended

[SameOldBills]

If they take stuff out they will have to put stuff in. If they want to change it around go ahead but keep it exciting. They don't HAVE to make the game worse with every change.

[NoSaint]

DrDareustein, on 16 April 2012 - 07:04 PM, said:

I think it's a huge leap in logic to conclude that the kickoff rule change was the ONLY reason that concussions dropped. Unless they are simply counting "Concussions that happen on Kickoff plays". And if that is the case, then his statement is skewed.

I guess my main beef with all this is that the NFL isnt making these changes because they really care about their players. It's making the changes to protect itself from litigation in the future.

The whole thing just sucks. We're losing our game of Football.

They were referring to concussions on kickoffs. The game changes, and players and coaches adapt. It's been happening for 100 years.

If you really want to know how safe a kr is, look at how many star players are trotted out on one. It's high risk, low reward. I enjoy kick returns, but also understand that changing 2% of the game to save 98% is not the end of the world, and that 2% is executed by backups and third stringers.

The game didn't end when clotheslines became illegal, it won't with defenseless players, it didn't end with forward passing getting huge or fair catches on kicks, and won't if kickoffs are eliminated..... It will end if it's leadership isn't proactive. I don't know if this is the right choice, but I get the concept generally.

TheNewBills, on 16 April 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

If they take stuff out they will have to put stuff in. If they want to change it around go ahead but keep it exciting. They don't HAVE to make the game worse with every change.

More regulation plays, and less commercials! (partially sarcastic)

Edited by NoSaint, 16 April 2012 - 07:31 PM.

[DrDareustein]

NoSaint, on 16 April 2012 - 07:28 PM, said:

They were referring to concussions on kickoffs. The game changes, and players and coaches adapt. It's been happening for 100 years.

If you really want to know how safe a kr is, look at how many star players are trotted out on one. It's high risk, low reward. I enjoy kick returns, but also understand that changing 2% of the game to save 98% is not the end of the world, and that 2% is executed by backups and third stringers.

The game didn't end when clotheslines became illegal, it won't with defenseless players, it didn't end with forward passing getting huge or fair catches on kicks, and won't if kickoffs are eliminated..... It will end if it's leadership isn't proactive. I don't know if this is the right choice, but I get the concept generally.

More regulation plays, and less commercials!

I've played, I know exactly how safe (or unsafe) kickoffs are. That's why people are attracted to the sport, it's unsafe. It's violent. The strongest survives. Our largest, strongest, fastest Gladiators in a physical battle.

If the leaders want to evolve the game into 90% elegantly choreographed pass plays, where you can't hit the QB or WR, then that is their choice. And I can spend my time (and money) on something else.

[l< j]

The game hasn't been the same since they outlawed the flying wedge.

[DC Grid]

DrDareustein, on 16 April 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

Good-bye NFL. Any more rule changes like this, and Im done with this league. I'll go watch ballet.

http://www.giants.co...c8-b37cd5226de9

I'm enjoying football as much as I can now, because between concussions and the dismantling of defense and special teams, NFL will be nothing more than soccer in pads within another 20 years.

[NoSaint]

DrDareustein, on 16 April 2012 - 07:35 PM, said:

I've played, I know exactly how safe (or unsafe) kickoffs are. That's why people are attracted to the sport, it's unsafe. It's violent. The strongest survives. Our largest, strongest, fastest Gladiators in a physical battle.

If the leaders want to evolve the game into 90% elegantly choreographed pass plays, where you can't hit the QB or WR, then that is their choice. And I can spend my time (and money) on something else.

And they will continue to collect record profits while avoiding billion dollar lawsuits and still funneling the best athletes into their sport at a young age. Blame lawyers, blame the legal system, but don't be a caveman and pretend the sport can exist in this society long term as is. You can still tackle, many of the biggest hits you've ever seen are still legal. People have been saying exactly what you posted for decades. The games gotten bigger, more exciting, and ratings have skyrocketed. they could put dresses on them and we'd still line up to see 6-4 men race down the field at a 4.3 40 to fight for a jump ball without losing their flags. No one EVER wants to see a guy laying motionless, everyone and their grandma wants to see randy miss out jump a db

DC Grid, on 16 April 2012 - 07:45 PM, said:

I'm enjoying football as much as I can now, because between concussions and the dismantling of defense and special teams, NFL will be nothing more than soccer in pads within another 20 years.

And what the nfl hears you saying is "the biggest international sport in the world."

Don't love it, but I've come to accept the evolution.

Edited by NoSaint, 16 April 2012 - 07:54 PM.

[JimBob2232]

...and what happens to the onside kick if they do this?

...and then why not get rid of Punts too?

It fundamentally changes the game.  I hope they dont do it.  They are worried about the liability the game creates.  I understand that, but its a profession, and its hazardous.  When you decide to be a professional football player you understand the risks...thats part of the reason why you make millions of dollars a year.

[NoSaint]

JimBob2232, on 16 April 2012 - 07:53 PM, said:

...and what happens to the onside kick if they do this?

...and then why not get rid of Punts too?

It fundamentally changes the game.  I hope they dont do it.  They are worried about the liability the game creates.  I understand that, but its a profession, and its hazardous.  When you decide to be a professional football player you understand the risks...thats part of the reason why you make millions of dollars a year.

Without looking, I'd guess the per play injury rate on punts (especially head injuries) is astronomically lower. No on gets a 40 yard running hit on pretty much anyone on a punt. Every kick return has that for about a half dozen players. I'm surprised that they haven't brought up a punt type play for kickoffs as a transition. Similar to the post safety free kick.

That or moving blockers up some possibly, so like a punt they engage defenders earlier in the process slowing down coverage and reducing collisions you see with the wedge type blocking.

[atlbillsfan1975]

JimBob2232, on 16 April 2012 - 07:53 PM, said:

...and what happens to the onside kick if they do this?

...and then why not get rid of Punts too?

It fundamentally changes the game.  I hope they dont do it.  They are worried about the liability the game creates.  I understand that, but its a profession, and its hazardous.  When you decide to be a professional football player you understand the risks...thats part of the reason why you make millions of dollars a year.

I think you are correct in this to a degree.
How long till the day that players sign a waiver for head injuries?
How many guys do think would not sign it? and thus not be able to play? This is a question so dont jump my sh*t. But think about it, how many guys do you think legitimately would not sign it and thus not be able to play?
You got guys like Manning, who have multiple procedures on their neck in order to come back and play.

[NoSaint]

atlbillsfan1975, on 16 April 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

I think you are correct in this to a degree.
How long till the day that players sign a waiver for head injuries?
How many guys do think would not sign it? and thus not be able to play? This is a question so dont jump my sh*t. But think about it, how many guys do you think legitimately would not sign it and thus not be able to play?
You got guys like Manning, who have multiple procedures on their neck in order to come back and play.

The real problem with regards to a talent pool is high school and college kids that never see a dime. How many parents sign that waiver without changes coming. The games always been violent but moms never had this much to backup her anti-football stance. If junior doesnt start at 13, he won't be an nfl player at 23. Like I said in another thread, a guy like drew brees might take that baseball scholarship 5 years down the line if he's worried about his noggin.

And don't forget, very few of your kick team players collect a million in their careers but if you go back through the year or two they try to kill it on a return team, college and Hugh school MANY are retiring with more concussions than years service in the nfl (at league minimum, of course)

JimBob2232, on 16 April 2012 - 07:53 PM, said:

...and what happens to the onside kick if they do this?

...and then why not get rid of Punts too?

It fundamentally changes the game.  I hope they dont do it.  They are worried about the liability the game creates.  I understand that, but its a profession, and its hazardous.  When you decide to be a professional football player you understand the risks...thats part of the reason why you make millions of dollars a year.

How many guys on the bills special teams unit made 2+ million last year? Without looking I'd guess the kickers (few hits) and brad smith?

Edited by NoSaint, 16 April 2012 - 08:15 PM.

[JimBob2232]

atlbillsfan1975, on 16 April 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

I think you are correct in this to a degree.
How long till the day that players sign a waiver for head injuries?
How many guys do think would not sign it? and thus not be able to play? This is a question so dont jump my sh*t. But think about it, how many guys do you think legitimately would not sign it and thus not be able to play?
You got guys like Manning, who have multiple procedures on their neck in order to come back and play.

Its a fine line.  Where do you draw the line between the inherent risk assumed as a basis of employment and the employer not taking adequate precautions to protect their employee.

If a roofer falls off a roof, is his employer liable for his medical care?  Does the answer change if he wasnt wearing company provided fall protection?  Does the worker have the right to sue his employer?  Does that answer change if the employer did not provide fall protection?  

Its admittedly a fine line, and im not sure how far waivers go if the argument is that the employer (NFL in this case) is not doing all they can to protect their employees.  Thats negligence, and most liability waiver clauses (i assume) do not apply to cases of negligence.  Even if they do, i doubt it would hold up in court.

NoSaint, on 16 April 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

How many guys on the bills special teams unit made 2+ million last year? Without looking I'd guess the kickers (few hits) and brad smith?

Dont forget about Spiller!

[NoSaint]

JimBob2232, on 16 April 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

Its a fine line.  Where do you draw the line between the inherent risk assumed as a basis of employment and the employer not taking adequate precautions to protect their employee.

If a roofer falls off a roof, is his employer liable for his medical care?  Does the answer change if he wasnt wearing company provided fall protection?  Does the worker have the right to sue his employer?  Does that answer change if the employer did not provide fall protection?  

Its admittedly a fine line, and im not sure how far waivers go if the argument is that the employer (NFL in this case) is not doing all they can to protect their employees.  Thats negligence, and most liability waiver clauses (i assume) do not apply to cases of negligence.  Even if they do, i doubt it would hold up in court.

A wise point and why I think the defenseless player rules are so big. The job requires you to look away from your attacker, and in turn that guy can't hit you in the head. It's eliminating a mandatory and very risky situation.

Without seeing data I'd guess kickoffs land far outside the normal injury rate compared to other play types.

JimBob2232, on 16 April 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

Its a fine line.  Where do you draw the line between the inherent risk assumed as a basis of employment and the employer not taking adequate precautions to protect their employee.

If a roofer falls off a roof, is his employer liable for his medical care?  Does the answer change if he wasnt wearing company provided fall protection?  Does the worker have the right to sue his employer?  Does that answer change if the employer did not provide fall protection?  

Its admittedly a fine line, and im not sure how far waivers go if the argument is that the employer (NFL in this case) is not doing all they can to protect their employees.  Thats negligence, and most liability waiver clauses (i assume) do not apply to cases of negligence.  Even if they do, i doubt it would hold up in court.



Dont forget about Spiller!

Indeed - spiller too. But you get the kicker who is at most right at that 2m range of "millions per year" and then the more elite returners. That leaves 20 other guys on the field, if not all 22 falling short of that "they make millions a year standard." You might get a few guys mixed in getting decent pay but few and far between.

[JimBob2232]

NoSaint, on 16 April 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

A wise point and why I think the defenseless player rules are so big. The job requires you to look away from your attacker, and in turn that guy can't hit you in the head. It's eliminating a mandatory and very risky situation.

Without seeing data I'd guess kickoffs land far outside the normal injury rate compared to other play types.

The real scary part here (for Fans anyway) is that it seems that both sides are willing to kill the goose to get the golden egg.  Alot of the things which make the NFL exciting and fun to watch are being removed or restricted.  Celebration penalties, kickoffs, hard hitting, actually hitting a Qb, etc.  I worry that at some point the game will be pretty safe, but it wont be any more fun to watch than an ultimate Frisbee tournament.  Did you see the Pro Bowl this year?  I fear that is where we are headed.  

My time and dollars will go elsewhere if its not enjoyable to watch.