Nfl must change playoff concussion protocol

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by -King-

There's so little logic you're following that I don't even know how to answer. Why should any player be ejected if they accidentally caused an injury? That makes no sense at all.

And how did the concussion protocol create Tonya Harding loopholes? The rule was meant to protect players from playing with injury and protect the league from players suing because of all the head trauma they get by playing. It's not like before the rule defensive players couldn't target a QB and take him out of the game if they wanted like you keep trying to say is happening now or can happen now. The difference is that now that QB won't be sent back to keep receiving those same hits that will eventually lead him to eating food through a straw. I don't know how you can find a negative in that.

If a defender knocks out a star qb, in most cases you ended the game for them. And as punishment maybe you lose 15 yards and MAYBE an unimportant player gets ejected. Concussion protocol makes it far easier to officially knock that player out. So what's the incentive for defenses not to play extra dirty? The NFL may have intended for player safety but the unintended consequence is that they created a loophole that makes it easier for defenses to end games on one play. If defenses are incentivized to play dirtier how has that made the game safer?

[MahiMike]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

If a defender knocks out a star qb, in most cases you ended the game for them. And as punishment maybe you lose 15 yards and MAYBE an unimportant player gets ejected. Concussion protocol makes it far easier to officially knock that player out. So what's the incentive for defenses not to play extra dirty? The NFL may have intended for player safety but the unintended consequence is that they created a loophole that makes it easier for defenses to end games on one play. If defenses are incentivized to play dirtier how has that made the game safer?

This guy gets it.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

If a defender knocks out a star qb, in most cases you ended the game for them. And as punishment maybe you lose 15 yards and MAYBE an unimportant player gets ejected. Concussion protocol makes it far easier to officially knock that player out. So what's the incentive for defenses not to play extra dirty? The NFL may have intended for player safety but the unintended consequence is that they created a loophole that makes it easier for defenses to end games on one play. If defenses are incentivized to play dirtier how has that made the game safer?

You're literally making up a scenario right now and acting like it's happened or happening.

Once again what would stop those same defenses from sending bottom of the roster guys to **** up the already concussed QB further?

If Mahomes is slow to get up and people realize it's a head injury and he gets let back in, why would the defense which you keep presuming is playing dirty target mahomes' head specifically knowing it will not only **** him up for the current game but for future games as well?

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by -King-

You're literally making up a scenario right now and acting like it's happened or happening.

Once again what would stop those same defenses from sending bottom of the roster guys to **** up the already concussed QB further?

If Mahomes is slow to get up and people realize it's a head injury and he gets let back in, why would the defense which you keep presuming is playing dirty target mahomes' head specifically knowing it will not only **** him up for the current game but for future games as well?

It has happened with bountygate. The NFL found out many teams (not just new orleans) were coaching their players to intentionally injure other players. Again, I am fine with keeping concussion protocol, but I also recognize the advantage it gives to a defense. Of course the stuff is still happening. Teams have been playing extra dirty this year to get in a QBs head. They've found ways around targeting.

The Tonya harding solution is a real threat in sports. It's not like the idea of removing aggressors is unusual. College more aggressively enforces targeting, and I'm not suggesting that. Hockey and soccer, more reasonably, do a much better job of consistent enforcement.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

It has happened with bountygate. The NFL found out many teams (not just new orleans) were coaching their players to intentionally injure other players. Again, I am fine with keeping concussion protocol, but I also recognize the advantage it gives to a defense. Of course the stuff is still happening. Teams have been playing extra dirty this year to get in a QBs head. They've found ways around targeting.

The Tonya harding solution is a real threat in sports. It's not like the idea of removing aggressors is unusual. College more aggressively enforces targeting, and I'm not suggesting that. Hockey and soccer, more reasonably, do a much better job of consistent enforcement.

Bountygate was nearly a decade ago.

There's no evidence this was targeting or dirty play.

There's no evidence Wentz going out changed the outcome of this game. Seattle comfortably won the prior encounter and were the favorite in Vegas.

There's no evidence that Clowney being ejected would have changed the outcome at all either.

There's no evidence that Wentz disagreed with the medical assessment of him.

When was the last time any suspected targeting of a QB occurred?

If you genuinely think this kind of dirty play is a real concern, I assume you support moving to flag football for the quarterback only, and any tackle of the QB that is not grabbing a flag is met by immediate ejection? Its a better idea than letting people with head trauma decide whether it is their best interests to put themselves in more physical danger.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Chargem

Bountygate was nearly a decade ago.

There's no evidence this was targeting or dirty play.

There's no evidence Wentz going out changed the outcome of this game. Seattle comfortably won the prior encounter and were the favorite in Vegas.

There's no evidence that Clowney being ejected would have changed the outcome at all either.

There's no evidence that Wentz disagreed with the medical assessment of him.

When was the last time any suspected targeting of a QB occurred?

If you genuinely think this kind of dirty play is a real concern, I assume you support moving to flag football for the quarterback only, and any tackle of the QB that is not grabbing a flag is met by immediate ejection? Its a better idea than letting people with head trauma decide whether it is their best interests to put themselves in more physical danger.

Of course losing Wentz to McCown made a huge difference. It doesn't mean Philly would have won. But everyone knows that game was over as soon as McCown went in.

I am not talking about this being a proven problem. I'm talking about how the Philly game exposed that the risk is there. And the impact is huge. If teams are willing to risk scandal by taping signals for tiny advantages, you don't think they're scheming up ways to exploit a big loophole like this?

I am not supporting arbitrarily targeting ejections on plays where the player goes back in. I'm talking about removing the defensive player as long as the offensive player is in concussion protocol. Again, I don't know if it's the solution. But it's at least an idea.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Of course losing Wentz to McCown made a huge difference. It doesn't mean Philly would have won. But everyone knows that game was over as soon as McCown went in.

I am not talking about this being a proven problem. I'm talking about how the Philly game exposed that the risk is there. And the impact is huge. If teams are willing to risk scandal by taping signals for tiny advantages, you don't think they're scheming up ways to exploit a big loophole like this?

I am not supporting arbitrarily targeting ejections on plays where the player goes back in. I'm talking about removing the defensive player as long as the offensive player is in concussion protocol. Again, I don't know if it's the solution. But it's at least an idea.

Hit someone till they get injured isn't a loophole. And it's not some new strategy that only came about because of the protocol. Jesus Christ.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by -King-

Hit someone till they get injured isn't a loophole. And it's not some new strategy that only came about because of the protocol. Jesus Christ.

The concussion protocol made it much much easier to knock a player out of a game. Sure, targeting penalties have made it harder to pull off. But it has not eliminated the loophole. If the right hit is pulled off the defense advantage is tremendous.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by Chargem

There's no evidence this was targeting or dirty play.

I call bullshit. Wentz is obviously going to the ground and then Clowney goes down on top of him head first when Clowney head was the furthest part of his body away from Wentz.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

I call bullshit. Wentz is obviously going to the ground and then Clowney goes down on top of him head first when Clowney head was the furthest part of his body away from Wentz.

First time I'm seeing it. It looks to me like Clowney could very well be trying to get his shoulder into the middle of Wentz's back so the guy gets up hurting. Hurting is legal and usually clean.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

I call bullshit. Wentz is obviously going to the ground and then Clowney goes down on top of him head first when Clowney head was the furthest part of his body away from Wentz.

If Wentz continues how he was calling, Clowney would have went over his back. But when Wentz braced himself with his right arm, it made him stay up for a the fraction of a second needed for their helmets to hit.

It wasn't a purposeful helmet to helmet imo.

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

I call bullshit. Wentz is obviously going to the ground and then Clowney goes down on top of him head first when Clowney head was the furthest part of his body away from Wentz.

When Clowney decided to lead with the crown of his helmet, he already knew that he was not contributing to the tackle at all, and that Wentz basically down.

He clearly lowers his head and drives the crown of his helmet down, targeting Wentz's head, while also trying to use his forearm and shoulder to impact Wentz's back and shoulder.

It is so clearly a dirty hit. The only real difference between the Clowney hit, and the Ben Davidson hit on Dawson is that Davidson was a second later on his hit because he had to run farther. Neither Clowney nor Davidson were making a football play.

The official's statement after the game is just absolute shit.

If that hit had been perpetrated by Vontaze Burfict, I believe he would have been flagged and probably tossed from the game.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk