Hits to the head ejection

hskrfan4life said:
accountability said:
LOOK. FOOTBALL IS A HIGH CONTACT, DANGEROUS SPORT. THE CHANCES OF INJURY AND CONCUSSIONS ARE HIGH. PLAY IT OR DONT. BUT DONT RUIN IT FOR THOSE WHO WANT IT TO STAY THE WAY IT IS.
Click to expand...
exactly. They know the dangers of playing football. Guess we will have to just watch 7-on-7 flag football soon.
Click to expand...
This isnt just an issue of football. It's an overall sh**ty path that society in general is taking. People wanna do sh#t and go places, but they dont want to be held responsible for their actions. When things go wrong, people want something or someone else to blame it on instead of pointing the thumb and saying "damn, I f'd up there didnt I?".

it's what's driving me nuts about the NFL concussion lawsuits. Look. it doesnt matter. You wanted to play. You knew it was dangerous. You played anyway. You lead with your head. Now you have issues. Too bad.

I goof around on Huskerboard at work all day. When I get carpal-tunnel in 6 years, can I sue my employer?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the NCAA is stupid enough to think that this is going to increase player safety, they have a rude awakening coming if they go through with this. It's not going to make players safer or reduce the number of helmet-to-helmet hits. Here's what it will do:

1) Force refs to be more vigilant about calling incidental helmet-to-helmet contact "targeting" because they will be charged with "upholding the NCAA's mission of increasing player safety", and

2) End up giving a bad rap to players who've done nothing wrong

They've been cracking down on helmet-to-helmet contact more and more in the past few years. Has it helped? Do I really need to answer that question?

 
Hammerhead said:
If the NCAA is stupid enough to think that this is going to increase player safety, they have a rude awakening coming if they go through with this. It's not going to make players safer or reduce the number of helmet-to-helmet hits. Here's what it will do:

1) Force refs to be more vigilant about calling incidental helmet-to-helmet contact "targeting" because they will be charged with "upholding the NCAA's mission of increasing player safety", and

2) End up giving a bad rap to players who've done nothing wrong

They've been cracking down on helmet-to-helmet contact more and more in the past few years. Has it helped? Do I really need to answer that question?
Click to expand...
Excellent point on #2 that i never even considered. Taylor throws a pick, and Burkhead makes the tackle but in doing so committs a drastic amount of helmet to helmet contact and thus is penalized and ejected. I guarantee you 100% Burkhead would immediately obtain a bad boy, dirty player type of perception in they eyes of many fans across the country who didnt know who he really is, and the thought of something like this happening is what makes this rule complete bullsh#t.

 
I support a lot of efforts to protect the players. Some the fans don't like but so be it. If you want football to continue to be played and enjoyed, something hast to be done about head injuries. These aren't something that you can look at after a game and know you have one. It is something that builds up over time.

That said, I do NOT agree with this. I have seen one heck of a lot of absolutely horrible calls over the last couple of years pertaining to "head to head contact". I do not have faith in the refs on the field being able to make that judgment call. Even if they review the play right after it happens to determine an ejection, they are always going to error on the side of precaution and people are going to be kicked out of games when they shouldn't be.

All that said, we as fans need to realize that the players of today and the game is totally different than when most of us grew up. They are so much bigger and stronger that there is damage being done to these player's bodies that simply didn't happen years ago like it is today. Sure, there were big hits 30 years ago like now. But, the average hit now is worse than the average hit in the past.

Efforts need to be made to protect the players or the game is going to be destroyed because of it. BUT, this action is wrong.

 
whateveritis1224 said:
Maybe eventually you'll see football end up with protection similar to Rugby.
Click to expand...
The two sports differ too much for football to be played with anything less than what it's currently played with. The style of play/hitting that takes place in football makes all parts of the uniform necessary.

I don't have that big of a problem with this. The way I look at it, players who target and lead with their head are risking their own safety while disregarding the safety of other players. If the tackler was the only one at risk it wouldn't be an issue, but when you involve another human's safety, you have to be held accountable. It's a rough sport, players know what they're getting into, etc. - yes. I don't think that's a good enough argument to argue against this kind of rule change, but that's just my opinion.

Maybe now this will teach players to rely more on their fundamentals. There were countless times last season where I saw players going in for the "high hit" only to see a much stronger offender shed the tackle.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The referee should not make the decision of a game ejection. This should be done after the game an ejection for the next game issued if the play warrants it. The Bell block comes to mind he would have been gone,where as the cheap shot hit on the Georgia QB by the Alabama player during a interception, or the cheap shot on our QB during the big 10 championship game where he was picked up and driven into the ground. Those last 2 where no calls on the field but would be if the game was looked at after the game.

 
Redmusky said:
The referee should not make the decision of a game ejection. This should be done after the game an ejection for the next game issued if the play warrants it. The Bell block comes to mind he would have been gone,where as the cheap shot hit on the Georgia QB by the Alabama player during a interception, or the cheap shot on our QB during the big 10 championship game where he was picked up and driven into the ground. Those last 2 where no calls on the field but would be if the game was looked at after the game.
Click to expand...
aka Eric Martin vs whimpy OSU kick return team member

 
If this really does happen, then on Monday the chief offical in charge should review the tape. If he finds that the suspension was unwarranted, the player should be reinstated and the ref who made the call should be suspended for 1 game. This may keep the ref's from making knee jerk calls.

 
HuskerThor said:
If this really does happen, then on Monday the chief offical in charge should review the tape. If he finds that the suspension was unwarranted, the player should be reinstated and the ref who made the call should be suspended for 1 game. This may keep the ref's from making knee jerk calls.
Click to expand...
Yeah, right like refs will ever be held accountable for anything they do.

If they do try to implement it this way thing #1 that needs to happen is all refs go under the NCAA and not under conferences. There is no consistency between conference games. And Way, way too much danger of refs making suspect calls in big non con games.

 
This new rule is bad all the way around! Too many variables to be making such a decisive decision in game! Look at the Kenny Bell hit against Wisconsin... he would have been ejected and replay shows it was a clean hit without a doubt! Even the announcers disagreed with the call!

 
No way that this doesn't end up hurting the Huskers, the ref's already have their minds made up they need to throw PI flags on us... Now this!!!! Kenny Bell could have been ejected for what was a completely legal hit. Maybe in 2014 they can institute the "illegal tackling of the ballcarrier" rule.

 
Back
Top