I AM AFRAID!!!!

Cam

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,591
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
I think imposing weight limits by position would create dangerous results with players cutting and trying to make weight like wrestlers and fighters. It would be too tempting for players not to abuse it in some way. Interesting idea though. If the goal is to reduce the big hits then I think they're doing a good job, even though I may not like the new style of play. I'm a big fan of cats like Steve Atwater, Ronnie Lott, Scott Case, Sean Taylor. I love the headhunting/intimidating style of football, that's what attracted me to the sport at a young age. I'm probably in the minority on this one and that's okay.
You're not in the minority. I think most people who watch football love the big hits (myself included). I especially loved watching Vic Alexander's high school tape because of his headhunting style. However, the current push for rules and regulations is in the interest of protecting the players. I don't want kids developing a debilitating preventable disease later in life just because I like to see them hit hard. That's just being selfish.
 

GTech63

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,117
Location
Montgomery, TX (77356)
Chuck Bednarik's hit on Frank Gifford happened in front of me at the Polo Grounds. It was scary to not see Frank move and be carted off. Hard clean hits are a part of the game and unfortunately people get hurt badly. Life in general can bring about unfortunate injury. Today players are bigger faster and impacts more violent. I have no problem with head to head contact rules or with chop block calls even though a lot of judgement is used even with replays. I have more problems with what is considered holding. It is so inconsistently called IMHO.

I see more and more players, backs, WR and DB that play bare kneed. Seems that is asking for injury.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
...
I see more and more players, backs, WR and DB that play bare kneed. Seems that is asking for injury.
I'm glad somebody mentioned that. In addition to abrasions and knee bruises, the fact is that it just looks tacky. Sorry, just tacky. Wear knee pads or wear short pants but make up your mind.
 

Eastman

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,289
Location
Columbia, SC
Although I didn't go to Tech I recall that Force=mass times acceleration. We have bigger and faster athletes that I competed with 40 years ago so that should equal more force and there was plenty enough force in my day to cause numerous injuries. The one thing I hate about football is the injuries and unless technology and rules can tame it to an acceptable level the pool of football players will continue to diminish.
 

Sideways

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,589
So my take on why so many more concussions. Yes, we are making sure players are not going back in after they "Get their Bell Rung" but I contend it is because of two things.
1. Less fundamental football being taught. If you tackle correctly instead of leading with your head you won't get concussed.
2. Less running and more passing. For those of us that played back when the wishbone and the veer were the offenses, it was hard to build up enough steam to hit super hard on running plays. You had to play disciplined. With all this passing QBs are exposed, WRs are in the open and DBs want the big hit.

This is a valid point. Playing against a high school team running a wishbone, veer, or even the wing T requires a certain amount of restraint. That said, a lot of this is caused by leading with the head. I only started one year of high school but I was taught to tackle with the shoulder and drag the runner down. I did not make any real big hits but they did't get away either. I wonder what "Ballin" and others think of this?
 

alagold

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,521
Location
Huntsville,Al
I'm afraid --of when Mills gets hit for the fortyish time and goes out for-----how long? and our inside game goes to nothing, causing the outside game to stop as well , then the passing which means a less than over-whelming DEF has to play a LOT more and collapses, etc ,etc
 

vamosjackets

GT Athlete
Featured Member
Messages
2,147
I'm afraid --of when Mills gets hit for the fortyish time and goes out for-----how long? and our inside game goes to nothing, causing the outside game to stop as well , then the passing which means a less than over-whelming DEF has to play a LOT more and collapses, etc ,etc
I think Quaide and Kirvonte showed me that they can be good in their own right in the Spring game. I don't think Quaide is too far away from a Zach Laskey level player (and that is a big compliment). I'm not sure what category to put Kirvonte in, but he's an intriguing player. So, I'm not overly fearful of the season being won or lost with Mills' short-term health.
 

Cam

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,591
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
Why don't we just quit playing football to satisfy all the pussies in the world.

Go Jackets!
It seems like the "pussies" who are pushing this research are the college and NFL players who are trying to figure out why they are developing dementia, depression, and memory loss at an early age. A lot of the brains in the study were donated at the request of players or their families.
 

augustabuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,404
It seems like the "pussies" who are pushing this research are the college and NFL players who are trying to figure out why they are developing dementia, depression, and memory loss at an early age. A lot of the brains in the study were donated at the request of players or their families.
I think he is referring to the "Ban Football" crowd.
 

tech_wreck47

Helluva Engineer
Messages
8,670
I think Quaide and Kirvonte showed me that they can be good in their own right in the Spring game. I don't think Quaide is too far away from a Zach Laskey level player (and that is a big compliment). I'm not sure what category to put Kirvonte in, but he's an intriguing player. So, I'm not overly fearful of the season being won or lost with Mills' short-term health.
Yea I think we will be fine at BB back, but I wouldn't sleep if Jordan Mason. I think he was very under rated. Here's his film.

 

Cam

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,591
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
I think he is referring to the "Ban Football" crowd.
I got the impression that the comment was pointed at the researchers who look into the disease and people who support the research (i.e. the players playing football for our entertainment). If anything they're trying to maintain the longevity of the sport. You need evidence of a problem to invest in a solution and it seems like a lot of people don't want to acknowledge a connection out of fear of it killing their favorite pastime. Football is way too large, lucrative, and ingrained into our culture to be banned. I think the only reason this research is picking up steam now is because a lot of the guys who played in the 50's and 60's are now dying and their brains can go through autopsies, not really because there is a crusade against football.
 

nod

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
706
I'm for less protection.
Go back to the leather helmets or rugby style and players will not lead with their heads as much. Seem like the better helmets are getting, the more concussions.
Rugby is physical, big hits but you don't see folks leading with crown of head.
Plus it better on the eyes when watching Notre Dame play Oregon.
Also, I wish they would bring back the face smack as a pass rush move, John Zook used to smack folks around with that move.
 

dressedcheeseside

Helluva Engineer
Messages
14,044
You mean allow the defensive backs to play the way they were allowed to 25 years ago? That's a noble concept :)

They're so handcuffed these days that in a lot of cases the only thing you can really do is jar the ball loose after it's already been caught. I laugh every time I see the ball hit a defensive back square in the middle of his back while a receiver is leaping up in the air and PI gets called because he didn't turn his head. I guess under thrown balls are the DB's fault now.
I don't get that either.
 

augustabuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,404
I got the impression that the comment was pointed at the researchers who look into the disease and people who support the research (i.e. the players playing football for our entertainment). If anything they're trying to maintain the longevity of the sport. You need evidence of a problem to invest in a solution and it seems like a lot of people don't want to acknowledge a connection out of fear of it killing their favorite pastime. Football is way too large, lucrative, and ingrained into our culture to be banned. I think the only reason this research is picking up steam now is because a lot of the guys who played in the 50's and 60's are now dying and their brains can go through autopsies, not really because there is a crusade against football.
There lies the problem. If the only brains observed are football players, then the result will be exactly what they set out to prove and will lead to their hinted but unstated goal of ending football. If their population of brains represent football players in the proper population per cent of the general public with dementia related death, then their work could be validated. And don't believe that any male dominated activity can't be killed in the PC world.
 
Top