No more low block in 2013? Maybe

[redbills]

https://mobile.twitter.com/SI_PeterK...15956992585728


Just reported on @NBCSN that NFL's Competition Committee will consider abolition of ALL blocks below the waist in 2013.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vlv6BrrxD_4

[OzTitan]

I recall recently during a televised game the commentators talked about this as they do and mentioned opponents to banning cut blocks say the run game in the NFL will suffer beyond repair if it is banned.

And I thought, why the hell is it still allowed? anything that forces teams to pass more is right up the NFL's alley going forward.

[phlysac]

Tackling below the waist soon to follow. Blocking and tackling disallowed entirely by 2020.

[Brent]

Originally Posted by phlysac

Tackling below the waist soon to follow. Blocking and tackling disallowed entirely by 2020.

[MetSox17]

I'd imagine tackling below the waist causes more injuries than blocking below the waist does.

[Docta]

Originally Posted by MetSox17

I'd imagine tackling below the waist causes more injuries than blocking below the waist does.

That's because it happens more often...

At least the runner expects to be tackled below the waist. You get injuries when you don't expect to get hit. It's why QBs often get concussions and RBs don't, despite a RB having to get hit 10+ times every game.

[Mufasa]

Originally Posted by Docta

That's because it happens more often...

At least the runner expects to be tackled below the waist. You get injuries when you don't expect to get hit. It's why QBs often get concussions and RBs don't, despite a RB having to get hit 10+ times every game.

Getting cutblocked shouldn't catch defensive linemen off guard

[Docta]

Originally Posted by Mufasa

Getting cutblocked shouldn't catch defensive linemen off guard

It shouldn't, but it does. Their eyes are on the ball, and that's the last thing on their mind.

[J-Mike88]

Everything between the thighs & the neck.... the "hit zone" like the strike zone in baseball.
Would keep the stars on the field more often, all positions.

Less of 3rd & 4th string stiffs and more of the stars.

DOCTA, I love Olivia Wilde... would like to follow her posts up all the time.

[TACKLE]

The fact that this is a real thing makes me oh so upset. The NFL is effectively trying to kill running games in the NFL. The thing that makes me so mad is that what the NFL does filters down to all levels of football everywhere when the NFL has ulterior, money driven motives when trying to make these rule changes.

Also, this won't help in protecting QB's all if RB's can't cut blitzers. More RB's gonna get rocked but no one cares about head-to-head hits when as long as the person receiving the hit isn't a ball carrier.

This may not go through but the fact that it's even being brought up makes me mad bro.

[ph90702]

Low blocks shouldn't be completely banned. They should only be banned if a guy is engaged or doesn't see a low block coming. I see nothing wrong with a low block if a guy sees it coming and can prepare for it.

[Caulibflower]

The NFL is so ******* corporate. The people running the show are not fans, they're ******* lawyers and businessmen. **** them.

[Mufasa]

Originally Posted by ph90702

Low blocks shouldn't be completely banned. They should only be banned if a guy is engaged or doesn't see a low block coming. I see nothing wrong with a low block if a guy sees it coming and can prepare for it.

The first part is already a rule. The second part is flat out ridiculous.

[Lil Quip]

Wow, kind of an issue.

I just do not see cut that blocking that critically important to running games. Granted some systems use as a basis. Plus it allows non prototypical lineman to be successful, thus being able to build lines cheaply.

I think pass blocking by rbs would be the most affected.

[bucfan12]

Nfl= joke....

[phlysac]

Originally Posted by Mufasa

The first part is already a rule. The second part is flat out ridiculous.

But the first part isn't always illegal. It's only illegal on passing plays and on run plays IF the lineman is MORE THAN ONE POSITION AWAY from the engaged blocker.

So... On running plays, it is LEGAL for the RG to chop block the man engaged with the Center, or with the Right Tackle, etc.

[BeerBaron]

Ha. Haha... Be careful what you wish for NFL defenders.

[MetSox17]

Originally Posted by phlysac

But the first part isn't always illegal. It's only illegal on passing plays and on run plays IF the lineman is MORE THAN ONE POSITION AWAY from the engaged blocker.

So... On running plays, it is LEGAL for the RG to chop block the man engaged with the Center, or with the Right Tackle, etc.

Wait, what? Since when has this been the rule? Pretty sure you can't chop block an engaged defender regardless of where he is lined up.

[FUNBUNCHER]

Mike Shanahan is not gonna be happy about this.

[WCH]

Originally Posted by TACKLE

Also, this won't help in protecting QB's all if RB's can't cut blitzers. More RB's gonna get rocked but no one cares about head-to-head hits when as long as the person receiving the hit isn't a ball carrier.

Originally Posted by Lil Quip

I think pass blocking by rbs would be the most affected.

If you watch the Packers, they've been sticking TE's in the backfield for pass protection purposes. It's not uncommon to see them stick two TEs in the backfield, with one lined up at H-Back and another at FB. They also frequently use two TEs in their "inverted wishbone" formations.

I think we'll see more and more TEs doing FB things in the future.

[21ST]

That got damn Mara!!!!

[themaninblack]

Originally Posted by Lil Quip

Wow, kind of an issue.

I just do not see cut that blocking that critically important to running games. Granted some systems use as a basis. Plus it allows non prototypical lineman to be successful, thus being able to build lines cheaply.

I think pass blocking by rbs would be the most affected.

Whilst teams don't cut as much as they used to because of the prevalence of the zone blocking scheme, it is still very important to a run game, especially when pulling to the second level and when trying to reach block a defender from the backside. It doesn't 'allow non-prototypical OL to be successful' so much as it is a tool to engage a down lineman who is a gap away on the frontside, or effectively neutralize a LB/DB on the second level who is obviously quicker/faster than any lineman(generally speaking).

Some teams also encourage cutting on short drops as it can prevent DL from getting their hands up to bat the ball down. Others also use it when an OL is making a 'down' block in order for another lineman to pull around him. These don't seem to happen as much as they used to though.

I don't personally see it as that much of an injury issue unless someone is cutting from the side/behind instead of just straight up. Everyone in the front 7 on a defense should be expecting to get cut on each and every play, not being cognizant of that is simply ignorant.

You are allowed to cut(to varying degrees) on nearly every level of football from middle school on up. Any good OL coach will tell you not to dive directly at the knees, instead try sticking your near arm in between the defenders legs and aiming for the mid thigh with your shoulder pad.

This would have a disastrous effect on pass pro in the backfield. Most RB's can't block worth a damn without cutting.

Injuries happen in this game regardless, and I doubt eliminating the cut block will really show much of a decrease in this. OL are more susceptible to injury from their own back or another lineman rolling them up from behind than defenders are from legal cut blocks, at least this has been the case in my experience.

EDIT: The ones I could really see them doing away with are when a FB/H-Back comes across the formation to cut an unsuspecting down lineman/EOL to prevent them from running the play down from behind. Don't get me wrong, I do like that play call but I can see where it can be much more dangerous than your average cut block.

[ATLDirtyBirds]

Good night sweet outside zone.

[General Zod]

Wrong thread

[CJSchneider]

Originally Posted by MetSox17

Wait, what? Since when has this been the rule? Pretty sure you can't chop block an engaged defender regardless of where he is lined up.

I'm with you on this. If you are engaged it doesn't matter with whom you are engaged or where you are lined up.