bitonti Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2013952 what a bunch of bullcrap this rule would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2013952 what a bunch of bullcrap this rule would be What the hell is the NFL thinking? Pretty soon it's gonna be the National Faggot League if they keep proposing rule changes like this. Hello, pro football is meant to be a violent game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latinlawyer Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2013952 what a bunch of bullcrap this rule would be I cannot believe they will still allow some form of cut block. That block literally has ended season for tons of linemen. Dammit, end the cut blocks. LL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjets Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 The NFL Competition Committee meeting in Hawaii this week will recommend that blind-side plays on "unsuspecting" players -- such as Warren Sapp's block on Packers tackle Chad Clifton on a punt return two years ago -- should be banished under the rules, league sources told ESPN's Chris Mortensen on Tuesday. If the proposal is adopted by owners at next week's league meetings in Maui, it will be specifically written into a broader interpretation of the unnecessary roughness rule. The proposed change came as the result of continued dialogue stemming from Sapp's block on Clifton during a game between the Buccaneers and Packers on Nov. 24, 2003, in Tampa. The play on which Clifton was injured occured in the third quarter, on an interception by cornerback Brian Kelly, and far removed from the action. Video showed that Sapp launched himself into the unsuspecting Clifton, who had his head turned and appeared to be slowing down.Clifton missed the remainder of the 2003 season with severe pelvic injuries. Another play that pushed the committee into action came on a 2004 Monday Night Football game, when Broncos offensive tackle George Foster dislocated the ankle of Bengals defensive linemen Tony Williams who, under the new interpretation, would have been an "unsuspecting player" because the play was beyond him. However, there will be no changes on the controversial cut blocks that are allowed within the designated blocking zone. Also under discussion this week is the specific "horse collar" tackle by Cowboys safety Roy Williams that broke the leg of Eagles receiver Terrell Owens. Williams injured four players with that specific technique, a committee member said Tuesday, and those incidents were still being debated by the committee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toon88 Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 "Another play that pushed the committee into action came on a 2004 Monday Night Football game, when Broncos offensive tackle George Foster dislocated the ankle of Bengals defensive linemen Tony Williams who, under the new interpretation, would have been an "unsuspecting player" because the play was beyond him. However, there will be no changes on the controversial cut blocks that are allowed within the designated blocking zone. " I agree that on an interception, blasting the QB who is 30 yards away from the play is a BS move, but it is legal. Or, lighting up the kicker on a return when the kicker is 40 yards away from the ball is BS also, but once again...legal. But these cut blocks, that the Broncos have made famous ,or infamous, over the years got to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitonti Posted March 16, 2005 Author Share Posted March 16, 2005 when done correctly cut blocks are safe - it's the one-two cut blocks where an OL cuts a defender who is currently engaged with another OL or cut blocks from behind that hurt people and those are already illegal - note that the NFL is not currently discussing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanTX Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 when done correctly cut blocks are safe - it's the one-two cut blocks where an OL cuts a defender who is currently engaged with another OL or cut blocks from behind that hurt people and those are already illegal - note that the NFL is not currently discussing this. Like the play Mawae used on Richard Seymour last December? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjets Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Like the play Mawae used on Richard Seymour last December? hey,,,,,perfectly legal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 This isn't a sport for little girls, this is football, this better not pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomShane Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 This is for sh*t. It's not going anywhere. That's why they leave the 'unnecessary roughness' description vague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.05f3dc52804d5fd84cf09ccfcd7bd10b.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.