How far is the NFL going to go to protect their precious superstars

**Nick** · -05-27-2005

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

Football is a violent sport that will always involve injury.

So you're ready to make facemask tackles legal then?

**r8rh8rmike** · -05-27-2005

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

So you're ready to make facemask tackles legal then?

Um, no. But if the intent of the competition commitee is to ban tackles that cause injury, their work is far from done.

**Nick** · -05-27-2005

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

Um, no. But if the intent of the competition commitee is to ban tackles that cause injury, their work is far from done.

So then why shouldn't facemasking be allowed? If you're taking the approach that injuries happen in this game no matter what kind of tackling methods are used, what's the logic in making it illegal to grab the facemask?

Consider me as the devil's advocate for the time being.

**r8rh8rmike** · -05-27-2005

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

So then why shouldn't facemasking be allowed? If you're taking the approach that injuries happen in this game no matter what kind of tackling methods are used, what's the logic in making it illegal to grab the facemask?

Consider me as the devil's advocate for the time being.

A facemask obviously has a much greater likelyhood of causing a catastrophic injury such as paralysis or even death. No question it should be illegal. A horse-collar is no more dangerous than the instances I mentioned previously. It has been around as long as shoulder pads but only became an issue because of what happened last year? The dangerous nature of it's effects are now only coming to light? Hard for me to believe.

I certaintly had not heard of any problems with it before T.O.'s injury, had you? I'm no expert and am only giving my opinion, but I see this more as a "we need to do something for appearances sake" reaction than something that was really necessary.

**Nick** · -05-27-2005

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

A facemask obviously has a much greater likelyhood of causing a catastrophic injury such as paralysis or even death.

Perhaps, but for as much as it happens, you rarely ever hear of serious injury resulting from it. Heck, I rarely hear of any injury at all from a facemask. I've seen many more serious neck/head injuries resulting from guys having their spine compressed because they took an awkward angle to the ball than guys having serious neck injury from having their facemask pulled. But maybe that's just me.

**r8rh8rmike** · -05-27-2005

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

Perhaps, but for as much as it happens, you rarely ever hear of serious injury resulting from it. Heck, I rarely hear of any injury at all from a facemask. I've seen many more serious neck/head injuries resulting from guys having their spine compressed because they took an awkward angle to the ball than guys having serious neck injury from having their facemask pulled. But maybe that's just me.

I think if a facemask was legal, you would see some serious sh**. Imagine a defender looking to grab a facemask and then yanking and pulling with everything they've got. A very scary scenario if you ask me. The facemask, without a doubt, is rightfully illegal IMO.

**Nick** · -05-28-2005

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

Imagine a defender looking to grab a facemask and then yanking and pulling with everything they've got. A very scary scenario if you ask me.

And apparently, according to the NFL, grabbing someone by the back of the collar and pulling with everything they've got is equally concerning. I guess we'll have to wait and see if defenses actually have as much trouble with this new rule as some imply, because honestly, I think a big deal is being made out of a practice that probably isn't seen as often as you'd think.

**r8rh8rmike** · -05-28-2005

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

And apparently, according to the NFL, grabbing someone by the back of the collar and pulling with everything they've got is equally concerning. I guess we'll have to wait and see if defenses actually have as much trouble with this new rule as some imply, because honestly, I think a big deal is being made out of a practice that probably isn't seen as often as you'd think.

I'm not so sure about the wisdom of the NFL, they have agenda's. I agree with you that the practice of horse-collars isn't seen that often, which makes banning it all the more puzzling.

**Nick** · -05-28-2005

Originally Posted by r8rh8rmike

I'm not so sure about the wisdom of the NFL, they have agenda's. I agree with you that the practice of horse-collars isn't seen that often, which makes banning it all the more puzzling.

When it's not seen that often, but results in a number of serious injuries, I can understand why it is something that is addressed in the offseason. The next question should be, what about the chop block?

**r8rh8rmike** · -05-28-2005

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

When it's not seen that often, but results in a number of serious injuries, I can understand why it is something that is addressed in the offseason. The next question should be, what about the chop block?

I don't know if six is that big of a number in the grand scheme of things, but you're right, chop blocks are bad news.