Tuck rule gone, helmet rule approved

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Sep 20, 2005
26,014
58,937
113
FUCK YOU
#1
PHOENIX -- NFL owners went into a speed voting mode before concluding their winter meeting in Phoenix on Wednesday, voting to eliminate the tuck rule, penalize crown of the helmet hits by players who are outside of the tackle box or at least three yards downfield and change the replay challenge rule so that a bad coaches' challenge doesn't prevent officials from reviewing the play.

The tuck rule change had only one dissenting vote, the Pittsburgh Steelers. The New England Patriots and Washington Redskins abstained, but the remaining 29 teams, including the Oakland Raiders, voted to end the rule, a call that cost the Raiders a chance to go to the Super Bowl in 2001.

Tom Brady was the famous beneficiary of the rule in that 2001 playoff game between the Patriots and the Raiders. A ball that appeared to be a Brady fumble was ruled an incomplete pass, and the Patriots went on to win the game.

Now, if a quarterback starts to bring the football back toward his body while trying to throw, it will be ruled a fumble instead of an incomplete pass.

"We didn't think it was necessary to make that change," Steelers president Art Rooney said. "We were happy with the way it's been called."

The Raiders celebrated the tuck rule's demise with a three-word tweet: "Adios, Tuck Rule."

The most debate came with the crown of the helmet hits rule, which will affect running backs the most. As of Tuesday, the competition committee felt as though it was only one vote away from passing. After further discussion, the vote was 31-1 with the Cincinnati Bengals voting against.

It will now be a 15-yard penalty if a player who is more than three yards downfield or outside of the tackle box delivers a blow with the crown of his helmet. If the offensive and defensive player each lowers his head and uses the crown of the helmet to make contact, each will be penalized.

"It'll certainly make our runners aware of what we expect relative to use of the helmet," Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said. "One of the questions I ask a lot is who gains from this, offense or defense? And it's a toss-up as to which side of the ball has the advantage on this rule, if any. The main thing is it's pro-health and safety, and that's the big thing."

The owners discussed simply using fines on ball carriers to eliminate the tactic but instead voted to make the rule change.

"Jim Brown never lowered his head," Rooney said with a smile. "It can be done."

Chicago Bears running back Matt Forte, who called rule proposal "absurd" Sunday on Twitter, reacted to the rule's adoption with similar disdain in a series of tweets Wednesday.

"Wow so they really passed that rule...last time I checked football was a contact sport. Calling bank now to set up my lowering the boom fund," he wrote.

He followed that up with: "Next year they'll probably be a no jumping over defenders rule... #loweringtheboomfund" and "Guess I'll get my fine money ready."

St. Louis Rams coach Jeff Fisher, co-chairman of the league's competition committee, said the rule doesn't prohibit a runner from using his facemask or hairline part of his helmet.

Commissioner Roger Goodell was eager to get the helmet rule approved, and there was talk the vote would be tabled until May if the rule change didn't have enough support.

But after watching videos of the play that clearly showed the differences in legal and illegal moves by ball carriers, the owners voted yes -- and then applauded the decision, something Fisher said is "rare."

"We had discussions with the players association and the players themselves, the coaches' subcommittee," Fisher said. "A lot of people talked to us about this rule and how to roll it out in our game."

Owners easily passed a change in the replay challenge rule that fixes a problem when coaches challenge a play that would be automatically reviewed in the replay booth. Under the new rule, a coach who challenges such a play is charged a timeout when he throws a challenge flag. If the play is overturned, the coach gets back the challenge. It remains a 15-yard penalty if a coach challenges a booth reviewable play.

Under the previous rule, if a coach challenged a reviewable play, there would be a 15-yard penalty and no review.

The only proposal that was tabled was whether to open the regular season as early as Wednesday. The NFL likes to open the regular season on the Thursday before the regular Sunday opener, and it likes to have the Super Bowl winner have a home game on that night.

The Baltimore Orioles have a home game Thursday, Sept. 5, and Major League Baseball appears to be unwilling to alter the time to a day game to allow the Baltimore Ravens to play that night.

On Tuesday, the NFL voted to prohibit teams from loading more than six defenders on one side of the snapper on extra points and field goals along with giving a 15-yard penalty if a blocker does a peel-back block inside the tackle box. The peel-back rule applies mostly to screen passes and rollouts.

wont be long til they get rid of equipment and it turns into flag football
 
Dec 2, 2006
5,619
2,231
113
40
Reno,Nv
#6
i dont understand the whole lowering your head as a RB thats you punishing them for making the fucking tackle looks like alot of RBs going to be getting less yards
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#8
Adrian Peterson and Trent Richardson are screwed
Not just them almost all running backs. This is fundamental shit. Lower your head when your about to engage. Lynch, Frank Gore, Jackson, etc. Any "power" RB does this.

Could you imagine late in a game and a RB breaks out with a 20 yarder to the goal line only for it to be called back as a 15 yard penalty? Lmao what a joke. Hopefully refs will hardly call it.
 
Dec 4, 2006
17,451
7,543
113
47
#9
Not just them almost all running backs. This is fundamental shit. Lower your head when your about to engage. Lynch, Frank Gore, Jackson, etc. Any "power" RB does this.

Could you imagine late in a game and a RB breaks out with a 20 yarder to the goal line only for it to be called back as a 15 yard penalty? Lmao what a joke. Hopefully refs will hardly call it.

it's a stupid rule..

what about when the defense player lowers his helmet and RB does the same to protect himself????
 
Props: Tony
Apr 2, 2010
3,249
490
0
37
#10
For real bro, it's one of the most exciting things to see too. Helmet to helmet is a problem for "defenseless receivers" but when a RB does it to a LB, both players were willing so it shouldn't be an issue.

I won't even fuck with football anymore if this shit stands, back to rugby.
 

prodigy91

@jordvnxsf
Mar 20, 2008
8,955
513
0
32
SF
#14
Not just them almost all running backs. This is fundamental shit. Lower your head when your about to engage. Lynch, Frank Gore, Jackson, etc. Any "power" RB does this.

Could you imagine late in a game and a RB breaks out with a 20 yarder to the goal line only for it to be called back as a 15 yard penalty? Lmao what a joke. Hopefully refs will hardly call it.
Even if the refs don't call it, first thing monday morning "Running backs [insert names here] got fines of $20,000 for violating said helmet rule..
 

Tony

Sicc OG
May 15, 2002
13,165
970
113
46
#17
Well then they should have a stip in NFL contracts called "play at your own risk". The NFL shouldn't be held liable for injuries because nobody is forcing these players to play and they're making a lot of money. And that's why they go to school (just incase their careers are cut short due to injury).