new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImagydSportsBos. Show ImagydSportsBos's posts

    new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    first of, where was pollard, what does he know and how much did he bet? seriously though, like the brady rule, goody has to wake up to reality.. u cant b losing stars like gronk.. moms are now going to really b scared having their kids play football.. whats worse, having a cripple with multiple surgeries (even if for one year) or one with concussion and brain issues  esp later on in life? you cant go low on a defenseless qb, so y is it ok to do so on a second level wr? huge guy is running at full speed and u jump low at him..

    jeez, what happens when u jump in forn of a train or mac truck? defenseless receiver has to be going low on a second level wr.. have to hit between the knees and head.. thats a lot of room. small guys may have to hold on for dear life or to slow guys down til someone else can go low  after they slow down the flow a bit.. but like with concussions, losing a knee esp to a gronk is equally UNACCEPTABLE. let the diehards start their jabro screaming.. its the right thing to do! do we want to b like the bruins and nhl?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kansaspatriot. Show kansaspatriot's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    lets hope they protect receivers knees with some kind of new rule.

    personally i'm tired of seeing guys launch themselves to knock someone down.  i want to see real tackling. not sissy tackling

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to kansaspatriot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    lets hope they protect receivers knees with some kind of new rule.

    personally i'm tired of seeing guys launch themselves to knock someone down.  i want to see real tackling. not sissy tackling

    [/QUOTE]

    Amen. But I wouldn't count on anything from goody.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    Spearing with your helmet should be illegal

    I thought it was, btw what ward did is not how they teach tackling in the new nfk

    l heads up program

     

    thus was dirty dirty dirty

    i have never felt this way, even pollard, but I hope this bozo gets taken out

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]

    And no part of the body can be speared by an nfl helmet, it's like hitting someone in the head with a hockey stick

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Like I mentioned in another thread, Gronk is a f**king beast. We've seen him fight through high tackles before and carry dudes at will. When you as a defender are tasked with bringing down such a behemoth, the best thing to do is aim low. Would I have aimed for Gronk's knees (Not sure he did)? No, but then I'm not being asked to stop a guy as powerful as Gronk.

     

    It was unfourtunate, I wish it hadn't happen, but I hardly think we need a rule change to make playing defense even tougher for defenders.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]

    And no part of the body can be speared by an nfl helmet, it's like hitting someone in the head with a hockey stick

    [/QUOTE]


    He used his shoulder.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Like I mentioned in another thread, Gronk is a f**king beast. We've seen him fight through high tackles before and carry dudes at will. When you as a defender are tasked with bringing down such a behemoth, the best thing to do is aim low. Would I have aimed for Gronk's knees (Not sure he did)? No, but then I'm not being asked to stop a guy as powerful as Gronk.

     

    It was unfourtunate, I wish it hadn't happen, but I hardly think we need a rule change to make playing defense even tougher for defenders.

    [/QUOTE]


    How is it tougher for defenders?  Wrap him up and wait for help if you can't do it yourself.

    You don't take out a guy's knees because he's a beast.

    Not to mention the defender is ALSO risking injury with spear tactics.

    Concussions are not specific to the person being hit.  The hitters can get them too and do.

    That's using your head, the right way.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MichFan. Show MichFan's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    Going at the knees can't be good for anybody.  But i also understand a 180-200 DB tyring to take on someone like Gronk above the waist.  The Gronks would run right over them.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    All the guys on the NFL show said hitting high is better than low and better for the players. Marino said "hit me high not low".  As did all the commentators. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from soxrockursox. Show soxrockursox's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]

    And no part of the body can be speared by an nfl helmet, it's like hitting someone in the head with a hockey stick

    [/QUOTE]


    He used his shoulder.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thank you I said the same thing on the bb death stare theead and was told to get my eyes checked.you see the same thing so its just not me .

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Like I mentioned in another thread, Gronk is a f**king beast. We've seen him fight through high tackles before and carry dudes at will. When you as a defender are tasked with bringing down such a behemoth, the best thing to do is aim low. Would I have aimed for Gronk's knees (Not sure he did)? No, but then I'm not being asked to stop a guy as powerful as Gronk.

     

    It was unfourtunate, I wish it hadn't happen, but I hardly think we need a rule change to make playing defense even tougher for defenders.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thanks for the post. I don't know if there was or is a harder player to bring down than Gronk. He is a freak of nature. Your typical nfl payer doesn't drag a 200+ lb CB like that,shake him off and keep,going. However, I do agree with seawolf that leading with a helmet at anytime or place on the body should not be permitted. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to soxrockursox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So, where is a defender supposed to tackle? Can't tackle high and can't tackle low? Why not just make it flag football?

    [/QUOTE]


    Gronk probably has 5 feet of body length between his head and his knees.  A normal player 4-41/2 ft. That's not a big enough target especially when you are of the same height or in that safe range?  Every player knows where a first down marker is and can stretch to hit it.  They can avoid the knees, too, if they want to.  He obviously didn't want to.  The only way to eliminate that is take it out of the game with a fine and suspension to follow.

    Ya, let's just go for the lower 15% and be done with it.  Perfect...

    I don't think it's coincidence that a lot of the elite players get taken out this way.  That's the second time he's been injured with below the knees, crap.

    Knees are not made to be slammed backwards or sideways,

    [/QUOTE]

    And no part of the body can be speared by an nfl helmet, it's like hitting someone in the head with a hockey stick

    [/QUOTE]


    He used his shoulder.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thank you I said the same thing on the bb death stare theead and was told to get my eyes checked.you see the same thing so its just not me .

    [/QUOTE]

    I first heard it was with the helmet, I then saw a video

    i you tubed it and saw more what tou saw but the helmet was hidden

    regardless going full speed into the knee was dirty, it wasn't a choice between his head or shoulders at all and it wasn't a solo tackle

    I wish someone would post videos

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    I'm all for a football "strike zone"

    but seriously OSHA would never let any other industry get away with allowing workers to be exposed to such a high level of preventable injuries. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    defensive players are already so limited, but that said, this particular tackle resembles that horrible prank some of us played in high school to trip people off their feet when they weren't aware. 

    There has to be a way to protect against this kind of play. But Tj's quotes said it all: to take a risk of fine and penalty he's not going high. He's going low. We're going to see a lot more knee injuries.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from crazyworldoftroybrown. Show crazyworldoftroybrown's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    How come he clapped after the Tackle?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    In response to crazyworldoftroybrown's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    How come he clapped after the Tackle?

    [/QUOTE]


    He didn't know Gronk was injured, he just knew he made a tackle and that Gronk had dropped the ball,

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    Rule: You cannot try to tackle without use of your arms. You cannot use your body as a projectile to try to bring down a ball carrier.

    Rule: If you tackle at or below the knees you must be trying to wrap up the ball carrier and not just trying to use parts of your body other than your hands as a projectile.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?


    My wife, when watching the game and the play, used the typical "That shouldn't be allowed!" whine. There was absolutely no way she was going to accept that the NFL, in their infinite wisdom, and following PC protocol and pending lawsuits, would rather have this happen than another head injury. Knees will heal with corrective surgery and therapy. Heads don't. Once damaged, always damaged.

    The NFL has put defensive players in this situation. How do you tackle a 250+ fast moving player with a tackle zone just about reduced to a postage stamp? I think that due to the "head shot" rules, knee injuries are become more pronounced/focused. But, they have ALWAYS been around. It is more a part of the game and is more acceptable to the fans. (Bad breaks, right?) Anyone remember Gayle Sayers? Unless, of course, YOUR player goes down with the injury. Anyone besides me think the DB that came out earlier this season saying that he's got no choice but to go low, causing more knee injuries, because of the rules is off base now? It's like teh NFL has become another US Congress.... gotta have a rule, then a rule to protect players affected by that rule, then another rule to protect the unprotected from that rule, then another rule to address potential situations that may be impacted by that rule adjustment or interpretation, themn another rule.... So much for the "judgement" piece of the game.   

    Just because Gronk got hurt doesn't mean the rule book needs more changing. It's bad enough that we practically have "DO NOT TOUCH!" on QB jerseys, and a reduced tackle zone for offense players due to the focus on head shots (doesn't even have to be a shot to the head, as long as the play results in the player's head being snaped back.) And I'm always LMAO when I see a RB or WR "stiff arming" a defender with a hand full of grill, yet let a defender go near the facemask, here come the hankies.

    Rules are what they are. We all need to pay better atention to what the "unintended consequences" are on rules and/or changes. There is no way the NFL will back away from penalties to "better protect" the player from head shots. Ain't ever going to happen. Law suits say so. So, let's get used to players losing time with lower back and leg injuries. It isn't going to change.

    Gonna miss Gronk plowing through defenders for the rest of the season. Pats chances to get to another Super Bowl just dropped precipaticely. That proverbial snow ball's chances are dramatically better.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tanbass. Show tanbass's posts

    Re: new GRONK rule coming from Goody?

    Okay, once again, can someone please tell me how to take down a guy like Gronk by going high? It's just not going to happen. He will run you over...period.

    You want to tackle someone, you are supposed to wrap up their legs, and stop them from moving. Some guys wrap up with a perfect form tackle. A lot of smaller guys like the DBs have been diving at the legs of the ball carriers for years trying to knock their legs out from under them. I personally think it's a bad way to tackle, but it happnes on almost every play.

    I think Ty Law and Troy Brown most likely know more than anyone here on this forum. They are bost very respected players. The both said this was a clean hit. Sorry but I'll take their word over anyone's here that the hit was clean.

    Yes it sucks, but this is reality in the NFL. If they put any more rules in about tackling, they will be wearing flags in a few years.

     

Share