NFL Helmet Rule: Your Prediction

[Soko]

We’ve seen some early examples of the new rule in the preseason games so far. Some believe the referees are calling it a bit more egregiously now to set a tone for the regular season, but others think this will be a big problem because it happens on virtually every play. 

For those who don’t already know: the rule forbids a player on either side of the ball from lowering their crown into another player, regardless of whether or not they’re “defenseless” like in previous years or if it’s a helmet-to-chest hit. It’s largely an issue because of most players’ instincts to lower their helmet and pad level when running into contact. It happens on a majority of plays IMO and thus, can be arbitrarily called.

How do you think this goes throughout the season? 

[Jakuvious]

I went with the second option. It's preseason, so just like the teams and players, the refs are figuring out how to deal with anything new that's been implemented in the offseason, so right now there's a mix of confusion and inconsistency. And the players and teams are still figuring it out and testing the waters a bit too. I think once everything settles, it won't get called enough to matter that much. Maybe you have that one unlucky team that feels really screwed over by the rule at a crucial time, so they lobby hard against it, but I think most of the league won't notice it on any drastic level.

And let's be real here, I feel like everyone knew the second it was announced that it's really only going to be called when it looks bad. Similar to defenseless player rules, it's not going to get called by letter of the law, it's going to get called by the perception of, that hit looks violent enough to be illegal, and technically was, so we'll call that one. Which will be dumb and annoying in it's own way, but will ultimately limit the impact.

[Soko]

1 hour ago, Jakuvious said:

I went with the second option. It's preseason, so just like the teams and players, the refs are figuring out how to deal with anything new that's been implemented in the offseason, so right now there's a mix of confusion and inconsistency. And the players and teams are still figuring it out and testing the waters a bit too. I think once everything settles, it won't get called enough to matter that much. Maybe you have that one unlucky team that feels really screwed over by the rule at a crucial time, so they lobby hard against it, but I think most of the league won't notice it on any drastic level.

And let's be real here, I feel like everyone knew the second it was announced that it's really only going to be called when it looks bad. Similar to defenseless player rules, it's not going to get called by letter of the law, it's going to get called by the perception of, that hit looks violent enough to be illegal, and technically was, so we'll call that one. Which will be dumb and annoying in it's own way, but will ultimately limit the impact.

I hope so. 

Im not sure how optimistic to be. We’ve seen calls against the QB or defenseless receivers that were violent, but legal by rule, get called as penalties. If this is called as you say, it’s essentially an extension of that and IYAM, it’s a matter of time before this starts changing the outcomes of games. 

I think right now, it’ll be a bigger problem than the catch rule was this passed season.

 

[base615]

Today was horrific. Some of the worst ones I saw:

Offensive player drops the head, Fuller penalised.

and, how is this even debatable. Perfect tackle, not late. WTF is wrong with it?

It needs to be scrapped before the first game. It’s a farce.

[childofpudding]

1 hour ago, base615 said:

Today was horrific. Some of the worst ones I saw:

Offensive player drops the head, Fuller penalised.

and, how is this even debatable. Perfect tackle, not late. WTF is wrong with it?

It needs to be scrapped before the first game. It’s a farce.

Second one is a different rule, the so-called Aaron Rodgers rule prohibiting driving a QB into the ground. It is equally, if not moreso, ridiculous.

Refs may ease up on enforcement once the regular season starts, at least that is my hope. If they don't, it will make it harder to watch games.

[vikingsrule]

I feel like this rule may be what ruins football as unbearable to watch with the refs having far too much control over the game. I guess will see what it looks like in the regular season, but if the preseason is any indication of where the sport is headed with these calls, I can't see how fans will continue to support this stuff. The NFL needs to figure this out fast and I'm not even confident that the refs know what to call or the players know how to avoid it. I feel as if the rule should be scrapped for now until it can be more objectively defined, which probably won't happen because of the inherent nature of the sport.

[Nabbs4u]

Went with Reversed (revised) next year. A "Team" or two with high expectations will miss the playoffs and or lose a game in the playoffs because of one of these calls. Only then will the owners of those team's, Mitch and Complain enough for change the next season.

It's coming!!

 

[Soko]

2 hours ago, base615 said:

Today was horrific. Some of the worst ones I saw:

Offensive player drops the head, Fuller penalised.

and, how is this even debatable. Perfect tackle, not late. WTF is wrong with it?

Didn’t watch that game but based on the commentating and the short clip, I assume the refs called it wrong. I could see that as hitting a defenseless receiver because it was a couple steps after the ball came and he did get hit in the head. Obviously the Broncos player dropped his head and created the head-to-shoulder contact, but we’ve seen that one before.

[ttitansfan4life]

It will ruin football and isn’t going anywhere. Where’s that option?

[Uncle Buck]

It will enable the teams the option of going back to the old school leather helmets, or maybe even no helmets at all.  No reason to wear a helmet if the players can't hit each other.

[MWil23]

That roughing the passer penalty, if not addressed, will kill the game of football. Why are ratings going down? Probably because perfect head to the side and chest contact form tackles on offensive players who have the ball (a sack in this case) are now unnecessary roughness penalties. How anyone is supposed to play defense against any QB, let alone 240-260 pounders like Ben or Cam is beyond me.

[tom cody]

Went with Option 2. 

[TheVillain112]

While I've hated the calls so far in preseason, I do kinda get it still.  Ryan Shaizer had a lot of bad tackles before he ultimately hurt himself.  If the coaches aren't doing enough to coach bad technique out of players, then the league doing this is kind of understandable.  Hate seeing injuries like that...

[August4th]

3 hours ago, Uncle Buck said:

It will enable the teams the option of going back to the old school leather helmets, or maybe even no helmets at all.  No reason to wear a helmet if the players can't hit each other.

can see teams wearing something like this in the future ..they use it in flag football and other football activities

[Buc Ball]

I really don’t think this rule will have that much of a negative impact in the long term. The intention of the rule is to penalise poor form tackles in an attempt to take them out the game.

This rule will be like the defenceless receiver rule or the defensive holding rule. People will argue that it will ruin the game because so many penalties will be called as the players get used to it. That will probably happen at the start, but if it reduces the incidence of guys with bad form putting axial loads through their necks, then that can only be a good thing.