Defenders can no longer hit a QB in the act of throwing...

[Champ]

I did a search on this and nothing came up but I can't see how this tidbit slipped through the cracks.

Rules defining a defenseless player will be expanded and now will include eight categories:

• A quarterback in the act of throwing;

• A receiver trying to catch a pass;

• A runner already in the grasp of tacklers and having his forward progress stopped;

• A player fielding a punt or a kickoff;

• A kicker or punter during the kick;

• A quarterback at any time after change of possession;

• A receiver who receives a blind-side block;

• A player already on the ground.

So what do defenders do, slow down like they're playing flag football? Risk a penalty by going after the ball? Im all for protecting the players but this is getting absurd. They've legitimately changed the game with this one...

NFL talks tough on hits, to mull kickoff changes - ESPN


Funny image by LSUfreak

 

[JayDizzle]

Gotta keep the Quarterbacks alive to keep making money...

I suppose Ben Rapistberger will never have to worry about taking a hit again as long as he stays behind the LOS and pump fakes all damn day.

[j.hen]

I can definitely see some QBs taking advantage of this shit. Big Ben for sure.

[SuperKevin]

Why is J Hen still posting? Be a man of your word.

[Aso]

The three that bother me are: a receiver trying to catch a pass, a returner fielding a punt, and a QB in the act of throwing.

What is a defender suppose to do when a receiver is trying to catch a pass? Just wait there? Thats not football. And for a returner fielding a punt, if you don't wanna get hit call a fair catch. It's not like their is already something in the rules to protect you. And the QB in the act of throwing is gonna be a disaster. Most defenders probably won't be able to let up and they'll get hit with a flag.

This is getting silly. Hopefully they get changed back in a few years.

[PP]

I think the QB in act of throwing is like the follow through. Pretty much a late hit like it is now. With a receiver you can't tackle them until they touch the ball.. so thats really the same too. I am not sure about the QB after a change of possession. What if the QB goes to make the tackle he can't be blocked? I assume the rule is to not just have a defender engage him and blindside him.

[FUSE]

Only thing that has changed is the kickoff, which now starts at the 35. Touchbacks are staying the same and illegal hits changes have yet to be voted on.

NFL votes to change rules for kickoffs, replay - ESPN

[strahanfan92]

I did a search on this and nothing came up but I can't see how this tidbit slipped through the cracks.

Great search you did.

[Champ]

Great search you did.

I meant online not on the website.

[Warner2BruceTD]

I am not sure about the QB after a change of possession. What if the QB goes to make the tackle he can't be blocked? I assume the rule is to not just have a defender engage him and blindside him.

I think what they are trying to get rid of is those cheap shots that guys take at QB's during INT/fumble returns. You see it all the time, a defensive player will immediately zero in on the QB, even if he is nowhere near the play...just because its a chance to hit the QB.

The play that sticks out in my mind is when the Saints were playing the Cards in the playoffs two years ago, and Kurt Warner was absolutely killed via cheapshot during a point in the play where it was clear he wasnt going to have anything to do with the tackle. Technically, it was a legal hit, but there was really no need for the defender to hit him as hard as he did. If it was a RB or G or something, he wouldnt have put so much effort into the hit. It was all about headhunting the QB. That's bush league garbage, and it needs to go before someone gets seriously hurt.

[Raidersabc123]

Gotta keep the Quarterbacks alive to keep making money...

I suppose Ben Rapistberger will never have to worry about taking a hit again as long as he stays behind the LOS and pump fakes all damn day.

Are you sure?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFGLmKrOeQ0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFGLmKrOeQ0[/ame]

[Fappin Raptor]

I think what they are trying to get rid of is those cheap shots that guys take at QB's during INT/fumble returns. You see it all the time, a defensive player will immediately zero in on the QB, even if he is nowhere near the play...just because its a chance to hit the QB.

The play that sticks out in my mind is when the Saints were playing the Cards in the playoffs two years ago, and Kurt Warner was absolutely killed via cheapshot during a point in the play where it was clear he wasnt going to have anything to do with the tackle. Technically, it was a legal hit, but there was really no need for the defender to hit him as hard as he did. If it was a RB or G or something, he wouldnt have put so much effort into the hit. It was all about headhunting the QB. That's bush league garbage, and it needs to go before someone gets seriously hurt.

I understand what you're getting at but I don't think that's the play you're thinking of. Warner was going to make the tackle in that situation.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WVsEFaJZSo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WVsEFaJZSo[/ame]

[celtsxpatsxsox]

As I said in the other thread, it is the same as it has been for the last few years. All the article states is what a defenseless player (something that never had a clear definition till now) and that will start suspending players for illegal hits(hits to the head while in said defenseless position).

[Guest]

As I said in the other thread, it is the same as it has been for the last few years. All the article states is what a defenseless player (something that never had a clear definition till now) and that will start suspending players for illegal hits(hits to the head while in said defenseless position).

How are they going to judge that though? The "in the act of whatever" can be judged so different by each official. I think they are opening up a huge can of worms with most of those, and it could very well mean more seasons of high octane offenses.

The only ones I can defend are the ones with punters and kickers, the one about players fielding punts and kicks (though I think the rules now are fine) and if players are on the ground, and if a runningback is already in contact with two or three defenders.

[Prodigal Son]

All the players that are bitching that the NFL doesn't care about their health or safety, are now going to bitch about the rule change.