ilovetheoption
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 2,805
my point wasn't that Messick's hit was a bad hit. My point was that "targeting" is an awful rule.
You know, I love that hit, but it's pure BS that that is a legal hit, but cracking a WR over the middle is a penalty.
The emphasis on offense, offense, offense (driven by the NFL) has really taken some of the enjoyment out of the game for me.
I disagree with everything here. That guy got lit up and never saw it coming. He had his eyes fixed on our AB and was running downhill toward him. AM took about three steps straight down field and then takes an angle toward the oblivious Tulane player and lights him up.
What's funny about this play is that it defies the laws of physics. F=ma. Granted the db has less mass than MA, but he has way more acceleration. Newton's laws of motion are defied too. MA doesn't move backwards after the collision one little bit. It looks like a cartoon to me.
What's funny about this play is that it defies the laws of physics. F=ma. Granted the db has less mass than MA, but he has way more acceleration. Newton's laws of motion are defied too. MA doesn't move backwards after the collision one little bit. It looks like a cartoon to me.
True F=ma and both had the same force applied. MA just had his load transferred through the ground and the Tulane player had his force transferred though deceleration. Great hit.
(Physics nerd chiming in...) NavyNuke is pretty much spot-on here, although his formal "physics-jargon" leaves a little to be desired. That's okay though—it's not like anyone is going to have an exam on this stuff or anything (although my students have one tomorrow).
In a collision, the forces between the two colliding players certainly are equal in magnitude (by the 3rd law of motion), BUT if Messisk is planted with both feet squarely on the ground when the collision occurs, then he has more that just the collision force acting on him; the ground is pushing forward against him in equal measure to the force with which his legs are pushing back (i.e. bracing) against the ground (3rd law again). The DB, on the other hand, looks to be caught in mid-stride, and is probably not in a position to brace himself against the ground—he can't push back strongly against the ground, so the ground can't push forward strongly against the DB (there's that 3rd law again).
Once we have a handle on the net force that is acting on each player, it is easy to understand their motion. The DB has a large, unbalanced force acting on him (the collision force, plus maybe only a weak opposing force by the ground): BAM—total momentum kill. Messick, on the other hand, is experiencing opposing forces that are approximately in balance: his overall momentum is hardly changed, although he does pay a price for that, in the form of a large compressional load on his body—in essence, the two forces are trying to squash him in place, rather than move him anywhere. As long as his frame is able to sustain the load, he stays upright.
[Sorry....I saw physics mentioned and I couldn't stop myself....]
(Physics nerd chiming in...) NavyNuke is pretty much spot-on here, although his formal "physics-jargon" leaves a little to be desired. That's okay though—it's not like anyone is going to have an exam on this stuff or anything (although my students have one tomorrow).
In a collision, the forces between the two colliding players certainly are equal in magnitude (by the 3rd law of motion), BUT if Messisk is planted with both feet squarely on the ground when the collision occurs, then he has more that just the collision force acting on him; the ground is pushing forward against him in equal measure to the force with which his legs are pushing back (i.e. bracing) against the ground (3rd law again). The DB, on the other hand, looks to be caught in mid-stride, and is probably not in a position to brace himself against the ground—he can't push back strongly against the ground, so the ground can't push forward strongly against the DB (there's that 3rd law again).
Once we have a handle on the net force that is acting on each player, it is easy to understand their motion. The DB has a large, unbalanced force acting on him (the collision force, plus maybe only a weak opposing force by the ground): BAM—total momentum kill. Messick, on the other hand, is experiencing opposing forces that are approximately in balance: his overall momentum is hardly changed, although he does pay a price for that, in the form of a large compressional load on his body—in essence, the two forces are trying to squash him in place, rather than move him anywhere. As long as his frame is able to sustain the load, he stays upright.
[Sorry....I saw physics mentioned and I couldn't stop myself....]
cause you weakWhen I saw that on the replay today it did not even occur to me that it could be illegal. It was above the waist and directed to the DBs chest. A shoulder to the chest is legal everywhere in football correct? Where the DB is looking is irrelevant to the rule book. It is however, very relevant to the victim after feeling that pain. Wham! Football is a tough sport for tough people. That is why I don't play.
This is pretty much what I said a few posts earlier.
How do you "brace" against the ground when you are standing straight up? I know that's an exaggeration, but it doesn't appear that he has that much lean into the collision. Even if he does, the angle of the force is not equal to the angle of his brace, not by a long shot. I'm not challenging your explanation, only trying to understand it better. I teach physics, too, but in middle school.(Physics nerd chiming in...) NavyNuke is pretty much spot-on here, although his formal "physics-jargon" leaves a little to be desired. That's okay though—it's not like anyone is going to have an exam on this stuff or anything (although my students have one tomorrow).
In a collision, the forces between the two colliding players certainly are equal in magnitude (by the 3rd law of motion), BUT if Messisk is planted with both feet squarely on the ground when the collision occurs, then he has more that just the collision force acting on him; the ground is pushing forward against him in equal measure to the force with which his legs are pushing back (i.e. bracing) against the ground (3rd law again). The DB, on the other hand, looks to be caught in mid-stride, and is probably not in a position to brace himself against the ground—he can't push back strongly against the ground, so the ground can't push forward strongly against the DB (there's that 3rd law again).
Once we have a handle on the net force that is acting on each player, it is easy to understand their motion. The DB has a large, unbalanced force acting on him (the collision force, plus maybe only a weak opposing force by the ground): BAM—total momentum kill. Messick, on the other hand, is experiencing opposing forces that are approximately in balance: his overall momentum is hardly changed, although he does pay a price for that, in the form of a large compressional load on his body—in essence, the two forces are trying to squash him in place, rather than move him anywhere. As long as his frame is able to sustain the load, he stays upright.
[Sorry....I saw physics mentioned and I couldn't stop myself....]
I can't even get dressed without pulling a muscle at this point. Football? Out of the question.cause you weak
How do you "brace" against the ground when you are standing straight up? I know that's an exaggeration, but it doesn't appear that he has that much lean into the collision. Even if he does, the angle of the force is not equal to the angle of his brace, not by a long shot. I'm not challenging your explanation, only trying to understand it better. I teach physics, too, but in middle school.
How do you "brace" against the ground when you are standing straight up? I know that's an exaggeration, but it doesn't appear that he has that much lean into the collision. Even if he does, the angle of the force is not equal to the angle of his brace, not by a long shot. I'm not challenging your explanation, only trying to understand it better. I teach physics, too, but in middle school.