Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

New roughing the passer rule worse than helmet rule?

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
  • You can land on the QB. You cant turn your entire body into the QB and land on him with all your weight.

    I saw 7 sacks and a dozen QB hits in the Vikings-Bills game yesterday. I saw one penalty (and it was for helmet to helmet). So apparently people are doing it just fine.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 13548
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • The QB is a stationary target with guys coming at him from the front a lot, those from the side don't seem to have as big of a problem, when you come up the front your going to tackle thru the guy instead of like from the side be able to roll one direction or another, the momentum of follow thru of wrapping and driving like how your are taught propels you thru the QB and on top, difficult to twist at the same time.

    Now if you were grabbing him and hip tossing and or pile driving him that would be different, but I would think yes maybe bruised ribs but not a broken collarbone from how Mathews tackled guys, when you have a QB rolling out and a guy form tackling from the side or hooking and slamming to the ground is that gonna be a penalty also, that's where I see a broken collar bone, when the QB is driven to the ground after or while in the motion of completing a pass.

    Outside the pocket he is both a runner and a passer.


    This is where I have a problem with the rules.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24742
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Uncle Si wrote:You can land on the QB. You cant turn your entire body into the QB and land on him with all your weight.

    I saw 7 sacks and a dozen QB hits in the Vikings-Bills game yesterday. I saw one penalty (and it was for helmet to helmet). So apparently people are doing it just fine.



    At one point in our game after the penalty on the Cowboys they showed a graphic of thru the period last year in first 3 games there were 9 penalties, as of that time yesterday there were 21, so being called a little more then twice as much.

    And it is subjective as well.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24742
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Uncle Si wrote:
    PackerNation wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:
    PackerNation wrote:Feel sorry for the NFL and how it is being ruined with these horrible rules/calls.

    You don't get it. Most of the rest of the NFL's fans are laughing at you guys, because now Erin Rodgers doesn't have as big of an officiating advantage as he used to.


    No, you don't get it. Your childish insults and hammering of the Packers because you don't like them is blinding you to the fact that this can be a very big problem in the NFL when it comes to these types of calls. It may have cost Green Bay a critical divisional game against the Vikings but it could very well be another team next week. Or a critical call in the playoffs that sends a team home for such a foolishly called penalty.

    It's wrecking football. There is little to no chance that Clay Matthews can ease up after he blows through the lineman to make a hit on the QB and not keep from landing on him. It's a lousy rule and while QB's should be afforded some protection, they cannot be expected to ever take some hits.

    If you knew anything about football, you would also know that they are throwing flags on players exactly how they are taught to tackle and wrap up ball carriers.


    Referee Craig Wrolstad on Matthews penalty in pool report: "So, that's not a new rule. I had judged that the defender landed on the quarterback when he was tackling him, with most or all of his body weight, and that's not allowed. If you do that, it's roughing the passer."


    Clay Matthews doesn't know how to tackle. If he knew anything about tackling he wouldn't have got the flag. You clearly don't understand the rule as well.

    Also, why would a change in tackling to protect the NFL's best asset be "ruining" the game. As it is, the age range of those that watch the game is getting younger. They are not old men with antiquated beliefs about sport. Younger fans want their stars on the field, not crippled, concussed or worse.

    So... the fantasy football crowd will care less in the long run about tackling rules if their favorite players aren't being carted off the field.

    It's unnerving people can't see that. The inherent dangers of playing football are difficult enough. Making changes to the game to try and mitigate these issues is the only way this game survives.

    It's understandable you can't grasp that. Packers fans still want it to be the 1960s


    I read it and disagree with it as do many many others. It's subjective and never should have been called. Rules like this will ruin the NFL. I get trying to protect the QB but the hit Clay laid on the QB in both the Minnesota game and against the Redskins was legal. It should not have been flagged.

    I expected the NFL to stand behind the refs calls, they have no choice. But these "subjective" calls have to be eliminated. It turns games on their heels. The NFL has told these guys to not land on the QB, must roll off. That's precisely what Clay Matthews did. When a player does exactly as instructed and gets a flag anyway, something is terribly wrong.

    BTW, this isn't the smack shack, so you want to tell the crayon eating little Seahawk minions to keep the insults in the shack? You want good discussion, how can you expect to have such things with some of the comments here?
    Image
    User avatar
    PackerNation
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 584
    Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:29 am
    Location: Austin, Texas


  • PackerNation wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    PackerNation wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:You don't get it. Most of the rest of the NFL's fans are laughing at you guys, because now Erin Rodgers doesn't have as big of an officiating advantage as he used to.


    No, you don't get it. Your childish insults and hammering of the Packers because you don't like them is blinding you to the fact that this can be a very big problem in the NFL when it comes to these types of calls. It may have cost Green Bay a critical divisional game against the Vikings but it could very well be another team next week. Or a critical call in the playoffs that sends a team home for such a foolishly called penalty.

    It's wrecking football. There is little to no chance that Clay Matthews can ease up after he blows through the lineman to make a hit on the QB and not keep from landing on him. It's a lousy rule and while QB's should be afforded some protection, they cannot be expected to ever take some hits.

    If you knew anything about football, you would also know that they are throwing flags on players exactly how they are taught to tackle and wrap up ball carriers.


    Referee Craig Wrolstad on Matthews penalty in pool report: "So, that's not a new rule. I had judged that the defender landed on the quarterback when he was tackling him, with most or all of his body weight, and that's not allowed. If you do that, it's roughing the passer."


    Clay Matthews doesn't know how to tackle. If he knew anything about tackling he wouldn't have got the flag. You clearly don't understand the rule as well.

    Also, why would a change in tackling to protect the NFL's best asset be "ruining" the game. As it is, the age range of those that watch the game is getting younger. They are not old men with antiquated beliefs about sport. Younger fans want their stars on the field, not crippled, concussed or worse.

    So... the fantasy football crowd will care less in the long run about tackling rules if their favorite players aren't being carted off the field.

    It's unnerving people can't see that. The inherent dangers of playing football are difficult enough. Making changes to the game to try and mitigate these issues is the only way this game survives.

    It's understandable you can't grasp that. Packers fans still want it to be the 1960s


    I read it and disagree with it as do many many others. It's subjective and never should have been called. Rules like this will ruin the NFL. I get trying to protect the QB but the hit Clay laid on the QB in both the Minnesota game and against the Redskins was legal. It should not have been flagged.

    I expected the NFL to stand behind the refs calls, they have no choice. But these "subjective" calls have to be eliminated. It turns games on their heels. The NFL has told these guys to not land on the QB, must roll off. That's precisely what Clay Matthews did. When a player does exactly as instructed and gets a flag anyway, something is terribly wrong.

    BTW, this isn't the smack shack, so you want to tell the crayon eating little Seahawk minions to keep the insults in the shack? You want good discussion, how can you expect to have such things with some of the comments here?


    They try, but some are afraid of the Shack, others feel it's our house and we can piss on our floor but you can't.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24742
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • PackerNation wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    PackerNation wrote:
    RolandDeschain wrote:You don't get it. Most of the rest of the NFL's fans are laughing at you guys, because now Erin Rodgers doesn't have as big of an officiating advantage as he used to.


    No, you don't get it. Your childish insults and hammering of the Packers because you don't like them is blinding you to the fact that this can be a very big problem in the NFL when it comes to these types of calls. It may have cost Green Bay a critical divisional game against the Vikings but it could very well be another team next week. Or a critical call in the playoffs that sends a team home for such a foolishly called penalty.

    It's wrecking football. There is little to no chance that Clay Matthews can ease up after he blows through the lineman to make a hit on the QB and not keep from landing on him. It's a lousy rule and while QB's should be afforded some protection, they cannot be expected to ever take some hits.

    If you knew anything about football, you would also know that they are throwing flags on players exactly how they are taught to tackle and wrap up ball carriers.


    Referee Craig Wrolstad on Matthews penalty in pool report: "So, that's not a new rule. I had judged that the defender landed on the quarterback when he was tackling him, with most or all of his body weight, and that's not allowed. If you do that, it's roughing the passer."


    Clay Matthews doesn't know how to tackle. If he knew anything about tackling he wouldn't have got the flag. You clearly don't understand the rule as well.

    Also, why would a change in tackling to protect the NFL's best asset be "ruining" the game. As it is, the age range of those that watch the game is getting younger. They are not old men with antiquated beliefs about sport. Younger fans want their stars on the field, not crippled, concussed or worse.

    So... the fantasy football crowd will care less in the long run about tackling rules if their favorite players aren't being carted off the field.

    It's unnerving people can't see that. The inherent dangers of playing football are difficult enough. Making changes to the game to try and mitigate these issues is the only way this game survives.

    It's understandable you can't grasp that. Packers fans still want it to be the 1960s


    I read it and disagree with it as do many many others. It's subjective and never should have been called. Rules like this will ruin the NFL. I get trying to protect the QB but the hit Clay laid on the QB in both the Minnesota game and against the Redskins was legal. It should not have been flagged.

    I expected the NFL to stand behind the refs calls, they have no choice. But these "subjective" calls have to be eliminated. It turns games on their heels. The NFL has told these guys to not land on the QB, must roll off. That's precisely what Clay Matthews did. When a player does exactly as instructed and gets a flag anyway, something is terribly wrong.

    BTW, this isn't the smack shack, so you want to tell the crayon eating little Seahawk minions to keep the insults in the shack? You want good discussion, how can you expect to have such things with some of the comments here?


    There was no insult. Just a clearly defined statement. You do not understand the rules. You do not understand the NFL sack rules or the rules here on .Net. If you wish to lodge a concern then report a post. Do not discuss moderation.

    Much like Clay, a failure to adjust will cost you a spot on the team.

    You can disagree. Some do. That guy did not. He's a professional. I saw it and agreed with the call as well. Clay landed directly on top of him, all of his body weight, and then tried to roll off. That's not the rule.

    It is subjective. It is confusing. And it's certainly going to take players time to adjust. But it will not ruin the game. In the last 10 years the league has been dominated by off field violence, horrible on field injuries, movies and widespread coverage of the damage the sport does to its players, suicides and crippled vets stating they wish they never played the game and need constant medical attention. I think the precious game you remember needs to change or it will fade away.

    The crayon-eating minions is not a fresh take for you. I would hope for better than simple repetition.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 13548
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • chris98251 wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:You can land on the QB. You cant turn your entire body into the QB and land on him with all your weight.

    I saw 7 sacks and a dozen QB hits in the Vikings-Bills game yesterday. I saw one penalty (and it was for helmet to helmet). So apparently people are doing it just fine.



    At one point in our game after the penalty on the Cowboys they showed a graphic of thru the period last year in first 3 games there were 9 penalties, as of that time yesterday there were 21, so being called a little more then twice as much.

    And it is subjective as well.


    it's a new rule so implementation was always going to be bumpy.

    I'd like to see the college version brought in where teams can challenge or the video officials automatically review these calls. At least to start.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 13548
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • Uncle Si wrote:You can land on the QB. You cant turn your entire body into the QB and land on him with all your weight.

    I saw 7 sacks and a dozen QB hits in the Vikings-Bills game yesterday. I saw one penalty (and it was for helmet to helmet). So apparently people are doing it just fine.


    So explain how the hit on RW was avoidable. This is a textbook example of how stupid this rule is. The guy comes right up the gut and hits RW just as he releases the ball. That to me is a bang bang play and you cannot do anything to not land on him when your momentum has you already committed to the hit.
    "Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!"
    User avatar
    Ace_Rimmer
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 849
    Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 7:59 am
    Location: Vancouver, BC


  • Ace_Rimmer wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:You can land on the QB. You cant turn your entire body into the QB and land on him with all your weight.

    I saw 7 sacks and a dozen QB hits in the Vikings-Bills game yesterday. I saw one penalty (and it was for helmet to helmet). So apparently people are doing it just fine.


    So explain how the hit on RW was avoidable. This is a textbook example of how stupid this rule is. The guy comes right up the gut and hits RW just as he releases the ball. That to me is a bang bang play and you cannot do anything to not land on him when your momentum has you already committed to the hit.


    You're asking me to define and then determine the rule?

    I'm just a below-average arm chair quarterback. I'm telling you what I saw in the game that I watched.

    But, if you watch the replay, he lands on Wilson with all his body weight. They clearly do not want to see that anymore. How Crawford avoids that there is something only a professional NFL player will figure out, I imagine.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 13548
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • Uncle Si wrote:
    Ace_Rimmer wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:You can land on the QB. You cant turn your entire body into the QB and land on him with all your weight.

    I saw 7 sacks and a dozen QB hits in the Vikings-Bills game yesterday. I saw one penalty (and it was for helmet to helmet). So apparently people are doing it just fine.


    So explain how the hit on RW was avoidable. This is a textbook example of how stupid this rule is. The guy comes right up the gut and hits RW just as he releases the ball. That to me is a bang bang play and you cannot do anything to not land on him when your momentum has you already committed to the hit.


    You're asking me to define and then determine the rule?

    I'm just a below-average arm chair quarterback. I'm telling you what I saw in the game that I watched.

    But, if you watch the replay, he lands on Wilson with all his body weight. They clearly do not want to see that anymore. How Crawford avoids that there is something only a professional NFL player will figure out, I imagine.


    True, and that's the question. How does one do that at the pace the game is played at? Someone got hurt yesterday apparently letting up and trying not to land on the QB. I'm all for protecting the player, but this is getting ridiculous. Body slamming a guy like in the old days needs to go for sure, and so does any blatant intent to injure, but on a play like yesterday, they need to let that stuff go because it is part of the game and unavoidable.
    "Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast!"
    User avatar
    Ace_Rimmer
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 849
    Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 7:59 am
    Location: Vancouver, BC


  • That's where the NFL and Officials miss it, they want letter of the rule and have a problem with intent of the rule.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24742
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • Uncle Si wrote:
    PackerNation wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:
    PackerNation wrote:
    No, you don't get it. Your childish insults and hammering of the Packers because you don't like them is blinding you to the fact that this can be a very big problem in the NFL when it comes to these types of calls. It may have cost Green Bay a critical divisional game against the Vikings but it could very well be another team next week. Or a critical call in the playoffs that sends a team home for such a foolishly called penalty.

    It's wrecking football. There is little to no chance that Clay Matthews can ease up after he blows through the lineman to make a hit on the QB and not keep from landing on him. It's a lousy rule and while QB's should be afforded some protection, they cannot be expected to ever take some hits.

    If you knew anything about football, you would also know that they are throwing flags on players exactly how they are taught to tackle and wrap up ball carriers.


    Referee Craig Wrolstad on Matthews penalty in pool report: "So, that's not a new rule. I had judged that the defender landed on the quarterback when he was tackling him, with most or all of his body weight, and that's not allowed. If you do that, it's roughing the passer."


    Clay Matthews doesn't know how to tackle. If he knew anything about tackling he wouldn't have got the flag. You clearly don't understand the rule as well.

    Also, why would a change in tackling to protect the NFL's best asset be "ruining" the game. As it is, the age range of those that watch the game is getting younger. They are not old men with antiquated beliefs about sport. Younger fans want their stars on the field, not crippled, concussed or worse.

    So... the fantasy football crowd will care less in the long run about tackling rules if their favorite players aren't being carted off the field.

    It's unnerving people can't see that. The inherent dangers of playing football are difficult enough. Making changes to the game to try and mitigate these issues is the only way this game survives.

    It's understandable you can't grasp that. Packers fans still want it to be the 1960s


    I read it and disagree with it as do many many others. It's subjective and never should have been called. Rules like this will ruin the NFL. I get trying to protect the QB but the hit Clay laid on the QB in both the Minnesota game and against the Redskins was legal. It should not have been flagged.

    I expected the NFL to stand behind the refs calls, they have no choice. But these "subjective" calls have to be eliminated. It turns games on their heels. The NFL has told these guys to not land on the QB, must roll off. That's precisely what Clay Matthews did. When a player does exactly as instructed and gets a flag anyway, something is terribly wrong.

    BTW, this isn't the smack shack, so you want to tell the crayon eating little Seahawk minions to keep the insults in the shack? You want good discussion, how can you expect to have such things with some of the comments here?


    There was no insult. Just a clearly defined statement. You do not understand the rules. You do not understand the NFL sack rules or the rules here on .Net. If you wish to lodge a concern then report a post. Do not discuss moderation.

    Much like Clay, a failure to adjust will cost you a spot on the team.

    You can disagree. Some do. That guy did not. He's a professional. I saw it and agreed with the call as well. Clay landed directly on top of him, all of his body weight, and then tried to roll off. That's not the rule.

    It is subjective. It is confusing. And it's certainly going to take players time to adjust. But it will not ruin the game. In the last 10 years the league has been dominated by off field violence, horrible on field injuries, movies and widespread coverage of the damage the sport does to its players, suicides and crippled vets stating they wish they never played the game and need constant medical attention. I think the precious game you remember needs to change or it will fade away.

    The crayon-eating minions is not a fresh take for you. I would hope for better than simple repetition.


    He specifically adjusted on that sack to make sure he was compliant. Given the space and time of the hit and gravity, he had no choice but to land on the QB and even rolled off of the QB as the rules require, yet was flagged. Not only is the rule stupid and against the spirit of the game, it's subjective and therefore makes it almost impossible to actually fairly call the penalty or to leave it as a sack.

    Go back to the post I made with the refs comments about the sack on the Vikings QB. Are you telling that the ref actually saw Clay lift him up and slam him into the turf? Mind you, these refs are supposed to be professionals and are supposed to be able to determine these better than the average viewer. There is no way that was a penalty.

    Defenders have to be allowed to sack the QB without an entire bevy of rules heaped on the defender. It's a violent sport.

    How is this not a penalty:

    https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1043942616172179456

    He picks up Rodgers, throws him and lands on top of him.
    Image
    User avatar
    PackerNation
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 584
    Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:29 am
    Location: Austin, Texas


  • He didnt put the full force of his body on the qb. I mean thats what im seeing. And im sure they will miss some.

    Its a tough rule but its clear where the NFL is headed. They dont want injured QBs. Considering what happened to.yours ladt year and how it ruined your season im surprised you dont agree.
    User avatar
    Uncle Si
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 13548
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:34 am


  • Uncle Si wrote:He didnt put the full force of his body on the qb. I mean thats what im seeing. And im sure they will miss some.

    Its a tough rule but its clear where the NFL is headed. They dont want injured QBs. Considering what happened to.yours ladt year and how it ruined your season im surprised you dont agree.


    Go look at it again. He spun Rodgers around and then landed with his full weight on Rodgers. This should have been a penalty. Subjective? Of course. The NFL needs less subjective rules and more concrete calls.
    Image
    User avatar
    PackerNation
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 584
    Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:29 am
    Location: Austin, Texas


  • PackerNation wrote:
    Uncle Si wrote:He didnt put the full force of his body on the qb. I mean thats what im seeing. And im sure they will miss some.

    Its a tough rule but its clear where the NFL is headed. They dont want injured QBs. Considering what happened to.yours ladt year and how it ruined your season im surprised you dont agree.


    Go look at it again. He spun Rodgers around and then landed with his full weight on Rodgers. This should have been a penalty. Subjective? Of course. The NFL needs less subjective rules and more concrete calls.


    Swung him down, yes. Land on him, bull.
    RIP Paul Allen, 1953-2018

    The greatest owner in Seattle sports history.

    189-152-1
    User avatar
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4220
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:44 pm
    Location: In the basement of Reynholm Industries


  • Further evidence that our beliefs can alter and impact what we see.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    * Spelling High Lord *
     
    Posts: 29977
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Phoenix, AZ


  • Competition committee now stepping in wanting the over use stopped.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. :les:
    Member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 24742
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


  • New rules turning the NFL into the NFFL, National Flag Football League. These guys are highly paid and know what they are getting into. Like Terry Bradshaw said, he didn't have all these rules protecting him and he still managed.
    Biscanebay12
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 69
    Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 12:56 am


  • Heard the same warmed-over arguments about new rules to cut down on injuries in the NHL. The players have adjusted. Those that haven't no longer get playing time.
    The game is now super fast and showcasing awesome, creative playmaking.

    The NFL will benefit in the same way long term.
    User avatar
    Palmegranite
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 329
    Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 9:53 am


Previous


It is currently Sun Oct 21, 2018 11:46 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online