New England Patriots thread (MOD WARNING - #4503)

j8wk2feszrnpao

bruschi wrote: »

but do you not have to wrap your hands around in rugby when making a tackle?

That's the rule.
They have been penalizing players a lot more lately as players had begun to use the American Football style tackle (particularly when defending on the goal line when you want to force a player to the ground).

Any hit above the shoulders has also begun to be clamped down again. It's become a possible red card for players.

The 'tip' tackle is rugby is now pretty much a red card offense. That style of tackle was a broken neck just waiting to happen.

It's all a safety issue for the game, and the rugby authorities know that for the game to grow/remain-popular, it's about keeping players (obviously the star players most importantly) on the pitch.

Son Of A Vidic

CJC86 wrote: »

I don't necessarily blame Ward for it, but yes, they should have to tackle players rather than hit their knees. If you watch rugby, then you see those sort of tackles happening all the time. The tackling technique of defensive players around the league is awful, and it leads to injuries.

I said that before, they have a lot to learn about tackling. I've played both disciplines and AF players generally haven't got a clue. You don't have the luxury of a helmet in rugby, so when you tackle low, you wrap up the legs. You have to look where you are going, or else you'll get a boot in the face and have your nose rearranged. Size is irrelevant in Rugby when it comes to good tackling technique. Anyone remember Simon Geoghegan taking down Lomu in the Rugby World cup? The little wisp wrapped up his legs like an octopus and he dropped him like an oak tree.

Since AF players generally have no idea how to take a guy down by the legs or wrap them up. They usually go in blind and the helmet becomes a weapon. With my Rugby cap on, all I see is reckless OTT idiots. But with the AF hat on, all I see is guys that were never trained to do it right. If the NFL is so concerned about overall player safety. They might do well to take on a few Rugby players as tackling consultants and set up some tackling workshops to teach players how to leg tackle correctly. This should also start at grassroots level imo

From day one in Rugby, you are taught to get your eyes on your target tackle area, keep them there and follow through with the shoulder/hand ect. In American football it’s a case of “Ah sure I’ll fling myself wildly at the lower legs/knees here, hopefully hit something and I might as well be looking the other way while I’m doing it.” It's absolute stupidity when you think about it. But the NFL are to blame for it, because as long as their is no potential class action lawsuit coming, they couldn't give a crap.

vetinari

Yeah, the tackle on Gronk was within the rules but it really should be illegal.
If you come in at full speed and hit a guy square on the knee, it's going to be a high chance on injury every time.
Body physics don't go out the window just because its NFL.

Hazys

Schefter just tweeted...Gronk, torn ACL, MCL, season done.

Hazys

I feel horrible for Gronk and a little sick inside, not a dirty hit by any means, just the nature of the game.

I think we're screwed now to be honest. I saw some stat on screen during the game yesterday where they said our Red Zone TD% was 30th in the league without Gronk and 1st in the league with Gronk...we are fcuked come playoffs.

Players on IR:
Tommy Kelly - Was playing pro bowl caliber early in the season
Jerod Mayo - Second best defensive player
Sebastian Vollmer - Pro Bowl RT
Vince Wilfork - Best defensive player
Gronk - 2nd best player

These injuries are insane. Are these injuries worst than when lost Brady in 2008? I think its very close. Would you trade Brady to get Kelly, Mayo, Wilfork, Vollmer and Gronk back?

Probably not. I think that highlights how Brady should be considered for the MVP award, if the award is truly for the Most Valuable Player to a team and myself with the biggest Brady homer would even consider asking that question of trading Brady for 5 top tier NFL players.

CJC86

Hazys wrote: »

Schefter just tweeted...Gronk, torn ACL, MCL, season done.

Ugh. I wish Schefter was wrong for once.

It's such a shame with Gronk. Without a doubt the most dominant player at his position, but he just keeps getting unlucky with injuries.

TO.

CJC86 wrote: »

I don't necessarily blame Ward for it, but yes, they should have to tackle players rather than hit their knees. If you watch rugby, then you see those sort of tackles happening all the time. The tackling technique of defensive players around the league is awful, and it leads to injuries.

I've said it before on this forum, I'm a huge fan of both rugby and American Football, but the tackling in the NFL infuriates me. People also complain about the measures that are taken in rugby to ensure player safety (eg. tip tackle is a red card), but the players learn and get on with it.

I said it in another post but believe when I say the rugby tackle is no as effective for football than it is Rugby. The helmets and shoulder pads make it more difficult and keeping speed to wrap legs lets guys down.

I have seen many guys try wrap low and miss a lot in my time both in the IAFL and high school and college here. The technique is being thought to players but it doesn't always work. If you don't believe me head down to a IAFL team and give it a go.

TO.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Since AF players generally have no idea how to take a guy down by the legs or wrap them up. They usually go in blind and the helmet becomes a weapon. With my Rugby cap on, all I see is reckless OTT idiots. But with the AF hat on, all I see is guys that were never trained to do it right. If the NFL is so concerned about overall player safety. They might do well to take on a few Rugby players as tackling consultants and set up some tackling workshops to teach players how to leg tackle correctly. This should also start at grassroots level imo

From day one in Rugby, you are taught to get your eyes on your target tackle area, keep them there and follow through with the shoulder/hand ect. In American football it’s a case of “Ah sure I’ll fling myself wildly at the lower legs/knees here, hopefully hit something and I might as well be looking the other way while I’m doing it.” It's absolute stupidity when you think about it. But the NFL are to blame for it, because as long as their is no potential class action lawsuit coming, they couldn't give a crap.

You are wrong about guys being taught how to tackle low in football in fact very wrong. It is being taught and has been taught for as long as ive been in the game and further back. And at all levels. And you cannot compare both rugby and AF at all.

Son Of A Vidic

Hazys wrote: »

we are fcuked come playoffs.

I agree, Gronks loss is massive, he is irreplaceable. Look at last weeks game against the Texans. Three Texans were swarming around Gronk in the end zone and Brady throws the TD pass to a wide open Vereen. Even when he hasn't got the ball his presence does a lot of damage.

Then our two talented young rookies Dobson and Thompkins are banjaxed at a bad time in the season. Now maybe if Edelman, Vereen, Amendola, Dobson, Thompkins and Boyce can stay fit for the playoffs, it might offer some hope. But no doubt that is probably too much to ask.

Even with Gronk around, our defense has reverted to form in recent weeks. Yes injuries have riddled the ranks. But with Gronk out and a porous defense, the need to score 35 points or more to win games gets increasingly difficult.

Another worrying factor even when Gronk was around, is our repeated very bad starts in games.Trying to haul in a 25-26 point deficit, will be just too big a task when the playoffs arrive. I admire some of the lads who have spoken about it being 'America's Game' season. But after losing Gronk yesterday, I think it's more a case of Nightmare On Foxboro Street.

TO.

Also guys saying it should be outlawed is annoying me and making rugby references saying wrapping would stop the chance of a knee being busted. 1 rugby players dont wear helmets so comparing the 2 and saying oh if they wrap it stops helmets hitting knees but realistically all it will do is minimise it depending on the angle taken to wrap.

Rugby players get hit in the knees all the time but as there is no helmet hitting the knee you dont see the same kind of impact on knees and also rugby players will always make sure a knee doesnt hit their heads as lets face it a knee to the head wont be a good thing.

The only way the NFL protects knees is to stop low tackling and if you do that you might as well play flag. And I am all for safety but at what point do stop protecting guys so much. How about design better protection. The knee pads used right now protect nothing surely investing in proper impact pads around the knee is the best way to go.

Son Of A Vidic

TO. wrote: »

You are wrong about guys being taught how to tackle low in football in fact very wrong. It is being taught and has been taught for as long as ive been in the game and further back. And at all levels. And you cannot compare both rugby and AF at all.

Sorry I was never taught it when I played in the U.K. Yes, I came from a Rugby background and didn't need it to be honest. But I never saw it being coached properly, most AF players I knew employed a flying/lateral version of the chop block and that was it.

And of course you can compare Rugby and the NFL, the core principle to both disciplines is taking the man with the ball down to the ground. Different rule book, same principles. I mean we are not talking about comparing soccer and the NFL here.

It is high time NFL players learned to adapt proper lower leg tackling. Hence the reason I mentioned the NFL needing to employ people from a Rugby background in the first place. You do not see the same level of serious lower leg and knee injuries in Rugby that you see in the NFL. And that's because Rugby players tend to know how to tackle low effectively and properly. Unfortunately a lot of NFL players only know how to ‘tackle’ recklessly. The body armour and pads gives them that nice security blanket unfortunately.

TO.

Just because NFL players choose to tackle badly or go for big hits doesn't mean low tackling is not being taught from grass roots up when in fact it is.

I have played both sports and comparing tackling styles is pointless and I have already given the reasons above in 3 different posts.

And to be fair the game has come a long way since you played it in the UK and I don't mean any disrespect with that. How the game is taught has progressed a lot since then.

CJC86

TO. wrote: »

Just because NFL players choose to tackle badly or go for big hits doesn't mean low tackling is not being taught from grass roots up when in fact it is.

If you agree that NFL players choose to tackle badly, then why do you not think that the way they tackle low at the moment should be outlawed?

People keep throwing out the whole "If you take it much further it'll be flag football" line, but as a few of us have pointed out rugby is dealing with similar problems and succeeding.

TO.

CJC86 wrote: »

If you agree that NFL players choose to tackle badly, then why do you not think that the way they tackle low at the moment should be outlawed?

People keep throwing out the whole "If you take it much further it'll be flag football" line, but as a few of us have pointed out rugby is dealing with similar problems and succeeding.

I never said it should be outlawed. I also saw nothing wrong with Wards tackle either as **** and horrible as it was for Gronks knee.

As for rugby dealing with it. Yes they are but they dont have helmets to deal with. Helmets are the main issue here from concussions to knees getting blown up.

me89

Ugh is it to much to ask to have some Gronk in the play offs??

Doubt he'll be back for the start of next season either.
If we get a win in the play offs it will be a miracle.

TO.

CJC86 wrote: »

If you agree that NFL players choose to tackle badly, then why do you not think that the way they tackle low at the moment should be outlawed?

People keep throwing out the whole "If you take it much further it'll be flag football" line, but as a few of us have pointed out rugby is dealing with similar problems and succeeding.

You also took me out of context for some reason on my phone the quote doesnt work properly but that first paragraph in my post you responded to was in reply to corvus last paragraph in his post before mine where he mentioned players and reckless.

CJC86

TO. wrote: »

I never said it should be outlawed.

I just realised my sentence was a bit convoluted. I asked why you don't think they should be outlawed, given that you agree they tackle poorly/dangerously.

TO. wrote: »

You also took me out of context for some reason on my phone the quote doesnt work properly but that first paragraph in my post you responded to was in reply to corvus last paragraph in his post before mine where he mentioned players and reckless.

Apologies if I took you out of context. I quoted all of your post, and asked a question, since I thought that post contradicted your viewpoint somewhat.

TO.

Im going to finish on this point as my phone is a pain in the ass to post with but high school and college players go week in week out hitting high and low doing it properly and do minimal damage. As soon as players hit the NFL players give up on fundamentals and do what it takes for the hit. The fact NFL players do very few tackling drills whether in season or off sums the NFL up and players.

Do I think the hit on Gronk was a cheap shot or dirty? No I don't as I have seen many tackles like it go without injury and Gronk was just unfortunate as horrible as it was for him. The technique was good and there seemed to be no intent.

Contrary to belief low tackling is coached properly in various formats that do minimal if any to guys knees.

If the NFL outlaw low tackles how can you police the difference between trying to wrap up and just cutting someone at the knees. You cant especially if some contact is made to guys knees.

Let me ask you this had he wrapped and brought Gronk down but still blew out Gronk's knee would there be such a debate? No there wouldn't as there would be lack of an argument for intent.

Im bowing out on that I dont think there is anymore I can say on the subject at this point.

The lack of being coached proper fundamentals is not an excuse and I said the same thing when James Harrison made the argument with leading with the head. They get proper coach from high school all the way through college especially guys coming out of college in the last 10 years.

TO.

CJC86 wrote: »

I just realised my sentence was a bit convoluted. I asked why you don't think they should be outlawed, given that you agree they tackle poorly/dangerously.

I never said the tackle on Gronk was poor or dangerous.

Apologies if I took you out of context. I quoted all of your post, and asked a question, since I thought that post contradicted your viewpoint somewhat.

I also didn't contradict my own viewpoint.

CJC86

TO. wrote: »

I never said the tackle on Gronk was poor or dangerous.


I also didn't contradict my own viewpoint.

I'm not trying to argue with you, rather have a sensible debate. My point, which you've either misunderstood or avoided, is that I am amazed that you both hold the opinion (as stated in several posts) that NFL players tackle with poor technique; yet you also don't think anything should be done about it.

If they possess the fundamentals, as you say, then why should they not be strongly encouraged to tackle properly?

Utopia Parkway

The hit on Gronk is legal under the rules but I really really hate those type of tackles where the defensive player launches himself like a missile at the opponent's legs. Usually leading with the helmet and often without any real control over their bodies in flight. They are potential career enders every single time and even though the vast majority of players don't get seriously injured during those plays it is just down to sheer dumb luck that they aren't. Unfortunately for Gronk he got hit in just the wrong spot. I know these tackles are to bring down bigger players but there is a lot of space between the head and the knees to aim for.

As someone who had my knee blown out by a high tackle playing soccer once I sympathise with Gronk. These guys have short enough careers as it is.

TO.

CJC86 wrote: »

If they possess the fundamentals, as you say, then why should they not be strongly encouraged to tackle properly?

You are confusing what I wrote. The low tackle on Gronk was proper technique and decent fundamentals and when you hit someone low wearing a helmet there is always a chance a knee gets busted. So the only way to remove risk is to stop all tackling low which I don't agree with. As different situations and pursuits call for different low tackling styles so removing them all gives ball carriers a major advantage. It is going to be hard to make low tackling safe with low risk because helmets are involved.

As for teaching proper fundamentals in generally and stamping out bad tackles in general I never said they shouldn't be outlawed in general I dont know why you think I did. I have posted more than enough in here about how I feel about proper fundamentals I am not going to repeat myself over and over derailing threads. As a coach in the game and now in the US safety is paramount but within reason.

The NFL has a lot of problems when it comes to proper fundamentals and they should be fixed and certain players should cop the fook on.

j8wk2feszrnpao

TO. wrote: »

Let me ask you this had he wrapped and brought Gronk down but still blew out Gronk's knee would there be such a debate? No there wouldn't as there would be lack of an argument for intent.

You're right, there wouldn't.
That's why when I hear the player blame the league, rather than accept the blame himself, I think he's just excusing a potentially dangerous tackle.

Son Of A Vidic

TO. wrote: »

Just because NFL players choose to tackle badly or go for big hits doesn't mean low tackling is not being taught from grass roots up when in fact it is.

I have played both sports and comparing tackling styles is pointless and I have already given the reasons above in 3 different posts.

And to be fair the game has come a long way since you played it in the UK and I don't mean any disrespect with that. How the game is taught has progressed a lot since then.

Since you like I have played both disciplines, I would have thought that you would see the benefits of NFL players learning some rugby style tackling for lower hits. Because I think the NFL could benefit a lot from it and it needs to be seriously looked at it. My point was and remains player safety.

I'm not seeing this grassroots proper lower leg tackling you were speaking off. Most players are making hits totally blind, they have no idea where the point of impact is and that's acceptable in the League. Yet any level of logic should decree, that it shouldn't be acceptable.

Let's just say Ward employed a rugby style take down yesterday. This is the kind of tackle I would like to see...




Wrap up the lower legs, the helmet might not even have any contact and if it did, it certainly wouldn't be a devastating blow to the knee. A helmet against the back of your calves won't end you season.

Here's another one the league should look at....



That's a classic rugby hand tap, when done well you will be chewing dirt and still have a season left when you get back up. There's absolutely no reason why a NFL helmet should prevent this tackle from being made.

The obsession with concussions needs to be balanced with overall player safety. Gronk is an NFL superstar and if the league keeps losing its star players like this, something will eventually give.

TO.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Since you like I have played both disciplines, I would have thought that you would see the benefits of NFL players learning some rugby style tackling for lower hits. Because I think the NFL could benefit a lot from it and it needs to be seriously looked at it. My point was and remains player safety.

As I said twice already rugby style tackling is already being taught in pee wee high school and college. Just because NFL players choose not to use said techniques doesn't mean its not there.

I'm not seeing this grassroots proper lower leg tackling you were speaking off. Most players are making hits totally blind, they have no idea where the point of impact is and that's acceptable in the League. Yet any level of logic should decree, that it shouldn't be acceptable.

See above.

Wrap up the lower legs, the helmet might not even have any contact and if it did, it certainly wouldn't be a devastating blow to the knee. A helmet against the back of your calves won't end you season.

I played rugby I know how to tackle and I also know you add a helmet to the tackle and that Maybe in bold can and will be bad damage to a knee. I have seen it happen on a AF field. That is my main point. You still run the risk of damage when helmets are involved unless everyone tackling performs a complete and utter flawless tackle which lets face it rarely happens.

Here's another one the league should look at....

Sure the "league" could look at it but they don't influence the fundamentals as much as people think. High schools and colleges do and as I said coaches have been teaching good lower tackling technique for years now

AbusesToilets

Question for the knowledgeable posters here: When the Pats went for the onside kick, why did the Browns even try and touch the ball? Surely if they backed off and let it roll out then they would have gained possession and it would have been game over.

TO.

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Question for the knowledgeable posters here: When the Pats went for the onside kick, why did the Browns even try and touch the ball? Surely if they backed off and let it roll out then they would have gained possession and it would have been game over.

The kicking team cant touch it until it goes 10 yards and its a penalty if a kicking team player does or the ball doesn't travel 10 yards. Once the ball goes 10 yards its a live ball and fair game for anyone. Only punts the ball is dead if a kicking team player touches it or the ball stops moving.

AbusesToilets

TO. wrote: »

The kicking team cant touch it until it goes 10 yards and its a penalty if a kicking team player does or the ball doesn't travel 10 yards. Once the ball goes 10 yards its a live ball and fair game for anyone. Only punts the ball is dead if a kicking team player touches it or the ball stops moving.

Thanks for the answer, didn't know there was a difference between the kickoff and punts. Are players allowed to kick the ball in general play? I know they have drop goals but is it against the rules to do chip kicks or the like? Would the the kicking team automatically lose possession if they did that?

Son Of A Vidic

TO. wrote: »

As I said twice already rugby style tackling is already being taught in pee wee high school and college. Just because NFL players choose not to use said techniques doesn't mean its not there.

Well that's good to know, but it certainly never happened in my time. But since it's not appearing on the NFL field, is that because the current generation of NFL players have missed out on the rugby style tackling you were talking about?

TO. wrote: »

I played rugby I know how to tackle and I also know you add a helmet to the tackle and that Maybe in bold can and will be bad damage to a knee. I have seen it happen on a AF field. That is my main point. You still run the risk of damage when helmets are involved unless everyone tackling performs a complete and utter flawless tackle which lets face it rarely happens.

The tackles I posted above are tackles that would significantly reduce the risk of what happened yesterday. They are not difficult to master and I specifically used them to illustrate that wearing a helmet should not be an issue for them if executed correctly. All tackles can go wrong, but the stupid blind tackle yesterday never had a chance of going right.

TO. wrote: »

Sure the "league" could look at it but they don't influence the fundamentals as much as people think. High schools and colleges do and as I said coaches have been teaching good lower tackling technique for years now

As Ward said himself yesterday, he didn't want the fine so he went low. Now unless the NFL decides to start protecting players knees and start issuing similar types fines as head hits, it will keep happening. But it would all quickly change, if former players with wrecked knees came out with a class action law suit. Similar to what recently happened with the concussion cases.

TO.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Well that's good to know, but it certainly never happened in my time. But since it's not appearing on the NFL field, is that because the current generation of NFL players have missed out on the rugby style tackling you were talking about?

No most just throw what they learned out the window and do as they feel. Look at James Harrison and Brandon Merriweather with their excuses when it came to the leading with the head. Fundamentals never thought players to lead with the head but the lack of rules and guys going for the big hit did so of course players look for the scapegoat excuse.

The tackles I posted above are tackles that would significantly reduce the risk of what happened yesterday. They are not difficult to master and I specifically used them to illustrate that wearing a helmet should not be an issue for them if executed correctly. All tackles can go wrong, but the stupid blind tackle yesterday never had a chance of going right.

But as I said there is already lower tackling techniques that have been around donkeys years that create a minimal amount of impact at the knees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvyI_ACttAc&sns=em

This video is an example of a side line tackle that guys like Ray Lewis swore by. Its tackling 101 and teaches players to find the best pursuit angle and break down and take guys down at an angle and at the mid section. Most effective tackle you could make. As I said in other posts always going lower is a 50/50 shot as pads and a helmet impede your mobility and speed.

As Ward said himself yesterday, he didn't want the fine so he went low. Now unless the NFL decides to start protecting players knees and start issuing similar types fines as head hits, it will keep happening. But it would all quickly change, if former players with wrecked knees came out with a class action law suit. Similar to what recently happened with the concussion cases.

Ok so lets say the NFL get rid of what Ward did yesterday and tell players they must start wrapping up or playing safer and sticking to fundamentals when it comes to hitting low and just as many knees keep colliding with helmets. What then? Tell players they can no longer hit low?

Anyways im done with this have said all I can say on it at the point im repeating myself and its a pain typing on this phone.