Wake goes off on NFL

Just don’t make an aggressive move while the qb is in a defenseless position and you should be ok.

It’s not fair anyways so why would you want to do that as a defender??...simple...to injure the qb.

Not a fair fight, so respect the rule..other players like running backs have the ability to deliver a blow to you, fair fight..

Love the Kraken but he’s wrong imo.

 

I've given this example multiple times over the years on here. Run full speed towards a plastic full-size garbage can (it can be empty if you want). Try to hit it first with one of your shoulders while wrapping up....then keep driving until the trash can falls over. But remember, at no point should your chest or your legs land on the trash can as you tackle it.

If anyone here can post a video here of tackling their immobile trash can...with good form at full speed...without "roughing the can", I'll send you $50 via PayPal. Fair warning though, I will not cover your medical bills when you screw up your knees/ankles trying to bend at ridiculous angles.

That's what we're asking defenders to do...and their full speed is a lot faster than yours.

 

I disagree that that’s what their asking for, there is a moment where in most cases you see an unnecessary subtle movement of the defender trying to drive the defenseless qb into the ground..

No need to try and punish a defenseless player, it’s bush league..

Try dropping back in a pocket with your eyes completely focused downfield when you have defenders trying to take cheap shots at you while you can’t even tense your body up for impact..not a fair fight key, so why would you want it..

Clay Matthews absolutely made a move to drive the body into the ground, without question.

 

Hmm.. maybe the NFL should just have players wear bear-proof suits lol. Fewer injuries dude.. lol

Here's a random one from youtube:

 

That move, as you call it, happens in a hundredth of a second from a guy going all out. You're asking players to forget 10+ years of training in a fundamental part of football to change how opponents are tackled. If the league is really doing this for the good of QB's, then make it two-hand touch and ban hitting the QB at all.

A rule to protect QB's that leads to DE injuries doesn't solve anything though. Carr even said last week he'd rather get hit full-on than see a defender end his season with injury. If the quarterbacks are saying this, then its obviously not a good rule.

 

I can summarize, The new rule is stupid of being penalized for landing on a QB. It's the Aaron Rodgers rule. This is football. Someone tell the league QBs play football too.

 

They need to get over trying to drive a defenseless player into the ground..period..it’s not a fair fight key..

I respect the rule because any player in the field who is in a defenseless position should not have to worry about a defender trying proactively trying to hurt them..whether it be a qb or a receiver in a defenseless position when he goes up for the catch..

Must untrain some unfair habits..

Listen I’m all for trying to destroy your opponent, as long as they know it’s coming and can play the game of mano a Mano.

It’s real tough to try and drive or hit a player who can’t protect themselves, real tough.

 

QBs are money for the league. They'll do anything it seems to keep them in the game.

 

As well they should imo, they are the most vulnerable players in the sport, a very violent sport..

 

I don't agree with this at all. What clay Mathews did and was penalized for two weeks in a row should be allowed and its horse $#*t he was flagged for that. I agree if its blatant nasty hits but those aren't, and while I can see in slow motion that he slightly leaned forward while landing on him, his head was to the side and it was a shoulder hit.......its football and they make millions of dollars to be in those situations. I understand the point of it, but they are taking it a little to far, and what bothers me more is the fact that star players get those calls more than any other player......to me that says its more about money than player safety.

 

Advantage player who is not defenseless.. why would you wanna sucker him?

 

I wouldn't, and don't think those tackles are that at all.....Blowing up someone blindside is....hitting someone low is, if intentional.....stomping on people is.....punching and pinching and other dirty $%@t that goes on in a pile is, but not those clay Mathews hits.....thats just football.

 

I don't see a quarterback as defenseless though. He knows at least 4 players are coming for him every down. The D line doesn't pick their attack angles either....that's determined by the offensive line and what they give. These guys are fighting for their lives just to get to the quarterback BY DESIGN- that's football. It's just not right to punish them if they tackle too hard for the league's liking.

We can go back and forth on this all day but the truth of the matter is that unless you want to significantly change the entire game, QB's will get hurt being tackled on occasion....just like WR's, RB's, etc.

 

I get what your saying, but if your in the act of hitting a completely defenseless player and you make a move to drive him harder in the ground that’s fair?

 

I get what you are saying too....but if you have to look at the hit in slow motion to see it then I don't think its a bad hit....

 

Eh, I really dislike dirty play in the NFL, but Wake is absolutely right about what he's talking about which is the lack of consistency between the safety of players across different positions. A defender can hit RBs and WRs (with the ball) much differently than they can hit the QB. He's suggesting that the health of the QB is more important than the health of any other player...and he's 100% correct.

The NFL has made it very clear that QBs are more important than anyone else and they're not even trying to hide it.

 

I’m okay with the new rules.... so long as quarterbacks are cool wearing those old school punter helmets with a single ring on them...

 

Naw... come on deej.. That's BS. Guys are trying to put a shot on a QB with the intent to injury. At least not the by far vast majority. The whole point of the physicality of this game is to impose your will physically. So, do you want to hit that WR coming over the middle? Absolutely. Are you trying to injure him? Not really. Do you want him to feel it, and think twice about coming over the middle again? You're damn right you do. Or, at least you did. Problem is the guys who take those cheap shots. Same with the QB rule... As Wake, what do you want to do? You want to make that QB uncomfortable back there. You want him to know you're a threat to hit him, and hurt him every single play so he rushes his decisions, and throws or freezes up and takes the sack. You want to hurt. You're not trying to injure to the point guys leave a game, or miss multiple games, you want it to hurt though, you want to wear him down physically and mentally. It's that simple.

The problem is these guys get paid big bucks, bigger than anyone, and they make money for the league, the owners, and even the rest of the players. Without them back there, ratings suffer, so owners want them protected at all costs.

Wake isn't wrong. He's absolutely right. Why are the QB's knees protected, yet every other player on the field now has their knees constantly subjected to abuse with the new tackle rules? Guys aren't wrapping up anymore, they're looking for hard hits, and since they can't go high, they're now going low, causing more knee problems. Hayes has blown out his knee, purposely trying to avoid a penalty on a completely clean hit and play. Why is that ok? Why is that being encouraged?

Fix the damn rules so they take the dangerous hits out. The ones that clearly cause injury, or look like intent. No idea why Hayes was even trying to avoid a penalty there, he's done nothing wrong on the play, but he's worried that if he falls on the QB, because (momentum and gravity are things that do exist) he may get a penalty? If Hayes doesn't do what he did to try and prevent a penalty, there's nothing he does wrong on that play that warrants a foul even if he lands on Carr. Guys get landed on all the time. It's a bull**** rule, for bull**** purposes IMO. Simple as that.

It's not about intent to injure. Yes, there's guys who have driven QB's into the ground looking like they'd trying to do more. I'm all for eliminating that, but not for eliminating a routine play. IT's all an over reaction to the Aaron Rodgers injury. Did that play warrant a foul? Did it look like the LB was trying to hurt him? Yeah. I'm ok with the foul, but that doesn't require over regulation and enforcement of a new rule. Eliminate that stuff when you see it, but leave the rest of it alone. especially when it's not putting other guys in harms way.

 

The Kracken is not wrong. In fact, he's spot on. The league knows it too, they just don't care. As long as the marquee QB's are healthy, they could care less if the bodies pile up, as long as their TV ratings and attendance numbers stay high.

Ask Dustin Keller who he agrees with, the NFL, or Cam Wake?

 

A defender can hit backs and receivers with the ball because they can protect themselves, or brace for contact, or hit back..

Receivers who go up in the air and are defenseless have the same rules apply as a qb would in a defenseless position.

The disconnect I’m seeing with the players and the rule is they are trying to justify that it’s ok to be aggressive to a defenseless player..thats a sucker punch imo.

 

Brandon, bottom line, no, I don’t agree that football is about hitting defenseless bodies to impose your will while acting like you did something manly..

Thats really tough ya know...”boy I really nailed that fu##ing qb while he had no clue I was coming”, “yo, did you see how I drove his limp azz into the ground, yeah baby, I’m a tough guy.”

 

Are you even reading? Or are you just being insane on purpose? Where did I say... what you're implying in that last line?

The QB isn't defenseless. He's got plenty of options. Be more aware. Move. Run. Throw the ball. Someone is getting hit on every play. If he gets hit, too bad, tough ****. That's football. again, im NOT saying guys should be out head hunting and trying to break QB's in half, body slam them, suplex, clothesline, whatever... I'm not saying that at all. However, when a 300lb defensive lineman breaks through, and hits him... you can't fault him if he lands on him. If he drives him down into the turf... Again, I get that. Call it. That's crossing that blurry line, but if it's just a football play like Hayes... that's not the over-reaction you're having, that's a football play. It's now also a football play gone wrong because of over emphasis of a rule because a guy has lost his season, and his knee. Why is that ok? That's the point Wake is making here... Hayes did nothing wrong. He tried to prevent landing on a guy he was tackling... which happens every play, at every other offensive position. Because he's trying to prevent a BS penalty, he's done. Carr plays another day, and took a softer hit, at the expense of someone elses knee. **** man, even Carr said he'd have rather been hit normally, rather than another player lose his season. Stop being so dramatic with that last line BS. Nobody is saying anything to that effect. At least I'm sure not.

 

I understand the league trying to protect players from unnecessary roughness, but isn't that the key term..."unnecessary"? We're not talking about the days of the 70's when linebackers or defensive ends would pick up a quarterback and pulled a WWF body slam or souplex. THOSE moves were indeed unnecessary and rightfully banned, but to expect a defensive player who is attempting to tackle the quarterback, who is moving at lightening speed to suddenly pull up and not HIT the quarterback is unrealistic. You can't stop on a dime.

Besides, with the advent of the running quarterback if you pull up, you've just missed a tackle. You could pull up on a Tom Brady and still tackle him. Brady isn't a running quarterback but what happens when you pull up on a Cam Newton? Uh oh, powerful little crap spins left or right and takes off running for a 15 yard gain when you actually had him for a 7 yard loss and the opportunity to force him 3 and out.

Protect players from unnecessary hits by all means, but don't punish players for merely doing their job...tackling the man with the ball. At this point, the league might as well put a skirt on the QB and make it illegal to even touch him.

 

Yes I am reading what your saying, and I wasn't talking about what you were saying in the last line, I’m talking about how Bush league it is from a players perspective to want to drive a defenseless player into the ground or try and take out a player through a violent hit when they are in a unprotected position.

Correct, if someone breaks through and tackles the qb cleanly without any extra aggressive movement to a defenseless player then yes that’s fair, of course, but that’s not what the league is trying to instill..Hayes did nothing wrong I agree ( that was a freak play) but it is up to the defender to not put any extra sauce on the hit of a vulnerable player...that’s not football when they do and that’s all the league is trying to do..

I have seen refs make mistakes on the call, which is frustrating, but I get what they are trying to do..

No extra aggressive movement to defenseless players.

 

I get that they shouldn’t slow down, but they have to zero in on the correct technique

 

I won't be, but others will be watching flag football in 10 years.

 

And they do because they know that all fans will do is cry foul on the net and then order sunday ticket, buy the current seasons hat/fav players or rookie jersey. Re-Up season ticket renewal, etc.

Its proven to work for them (see the kneelers) because butts continue to plop in the stadium chairs. They now maximize there insurance policy on their qb's and continue enjoying fan money unabated. Until joe and josephene fan decide the integrity of the game is deteriorating with horrid new rules each year and country is more important than a season of football than this will go on and on and on.

I have put my money where my mouth is and boycotted all things nfl, including my beloved fins for the past 2 seasons over the kneelers issue. But, obviously my stand wasnt joined by enough fellow fans (most stating sheepishly how they dont care about politics, they just want to watch football) for the owners to feel it in their pockets. I thought the 80 million dollars the nfl gave the players union to "invest" in more urban culteral studies on racism was supposed to end it this year. Nope!! They took the money and ran. And of course, our dolphins have the most kneelers. We the fans can end all these issues if we hit them in the pocket book and hit it HARD!!! But, only if we unite and do it.

 

Zero in on technique? Seriously? Perhaps the league needs to go back to school and zero in on physics.

270 lbs moving at 7 miles per hour closing on a target 4 feet away...target throws ball away .5 seconds before defender tackles. What is the PHYSICAL possibility the defender is not going to be able stop before hitting target?

Ponder that for a second

 

As I said earlier, it's one thing to see it on television...it's a completely different thing when you're that D lineman actually doing it. You train for years to explode off the ball, stay low, keep your balance, keep surging through the block, then explode at the QB....you're giving everything your body has in that two second burst. A QB sack or a clean pocket often comes down to a single step. Think about how long it takes you to take a step when you're running as hard as you can- a tenth of a second maybe?

What you're not doing, however, is thinking about your technique or how you're going to hit the QB.....it's all muscle memory and reaction from doing it a million times before. It's EXACTLY the same for linemen on both sides of the ball, there's no time to think, "Well, maybe I'll do it this way this time and give the QB a little extra." You'd have microseconds to make that call and I'm sorry, it's not a conscious decision. To change how someone tackles, it takes thousands of reps in practice to perfect that technique.

Again, you have to remember that every play is different. The angle is different. The QB's movements in the pocket are different. It's extremely hard to say, "Don't land on the QB" or "Don't drive them into the ground". As I said before, run as hard as you can into something and then try to gently lower it to the ground. It's almost impossible and you don't have ten plus years of training telling you to run straight through that object....plus you're not fighting a 300 pound man intent on stopping you.

It may look easy on television, but in reality it's just not. Why do you think there's only a few sacks per game across 100+ snaps for both teams?

 

I do believe that the NFL is interpreting the rule in an unrealistic manner. In order for a defensive player to sack a QB he has to hit him with enough force to knock, on average, a 6'3" 225 pound man off his feet. He has to hit in the chest b/c any lower or higher will draw a penalty. To hit him with enough force to knock him off his feet the tackler has to drive through him. He can't hit him with a glancing blow b/c QBs are just too big and strong. As the tackler's hit on the QB pushes him past the tipping point, the tackler then has to change his force to another direction to avoid landing on the QB. Or perhaps try to stop his momentum and land on his own knees and suffer the injury Hayes did. Those are your only options, stop your momentum or change the direction of your momentum. Realistically, it's often not possible to do either of those. The rule states "unnecessarily" landing on the QB. But reality is that most tackles involve the tackler landing on the tackled. Most of those do not qualify as "unnecessary"

The sack of Rodgers was a good example of the tackler applying unecessary extra force to drive the QB into the ground. But the vast majority of the calls this year are penalizing the tackler anytime he lands on the QB. There's a difference between landing on the QB and trying to drive the QB into the ground. Driving the QB into the ground is unnecessary, landing on a QB when you have no other option is not.

 

I don’t disagree per say, just feel like either have a target zone on the defenseless player or go for the strip, and don’t drive after contact.

 

It’s gonna take time from the ground up for the players to realize there are different rules for players in defenseless positions..it’s gonna take time for everyone to get it, but it has to start, because protecting them is fair when they are in that position.

 

Where exactly is this epidemic of blindside-hit QB injuries? I must have missed all of them, and surely there must be quite a few lately to warrant that being the main focus. I haven't seen a QB get injured like this in quite a while. In fact the QB tends to see the hit coming much more often than any other ball-carrier.

I've seen a few injuries of QBs getting their arms shredding from guys trying to strip the ball. Clearly that should be outlawed as well. Maybe we should require all defenders to duct tape their arms to their body.

 

As I indicated earlier, if you don't "drive after contact" as you put it, quarterbacks like Cam Newton and other strong running QB's are going to break these tackles.

I'm sorry, quarterbacks are football players too. At this rate, they might as well make rushing the QB illegal...that or institute the "5 Mississippi Rush" rule

 

Think about how cool that would be- no offensive lineman at all. The QB stands like he's getting the snap from center with the ball already in his hands. As soon as he moves, a timer starts counting down from 2.5 seconds. He does have a RB/FB in the backfield at all times...maybe this guy is a glorified lineman with decent hands. The D has two defenders on the LOS covering the QB/RB and they can't cross until that 2.5 second buzzer sounds, any pass/lateral or when the QB/RB advances within a yard of the LOS (they'd be forced to drop back first). So the D line is just shifting back and forth, tracking the QB and waiting to pounce.

I don't know if you'd call that football, but I'd actually enjoy watching it. It would be 6 on 6 though- 4 receivers, a FB and a QB versus four safeties/corners and two DL/LB. But heck, maybe you have 4 linemen as the receivers....it would be fun because there would be a lot of scoring opportunities.

Make it maybe a 15-man roster and eliminate kicks completely. Make it true 4-down football and if you stop the other team, the ball resets to your own 25. If a team scores, the ball resets at the 25. Only interceptions and fumbles THAT SCORE can change field position....otherwise, you get the ball at your own 25 on all turnovers.

 

Wake is obviously right.

 

Alright bro, so we're on the same page really. My bad, guess I misinterpreted your position.

That being said, I think alot of the calls they've made though, they havent been flagging the "unnecessary" roughness part, they're just flagging anyone that lands on the qb, whether it's inadvertant, or blatant. I get it, it becomes a judgement call, and we like to avoid that, but its just gotten out of hand IMO. I'm all for protecting players, but I'm not all for flagging them for hitting each other.

 

This. Exactly this. Couldn't agree more.

 

Ok so because there hasn’t been a rash of injuries you think it’s fair to hit a defenseless player in a aggressive nature?

They don’t get penalized for hitting or tackling them with proper technique.

The point is, the defender must make an act of responsibility to the VUNERABLE player he’s about to hit or tackle.