Super Bowl LIII

[MonkeyFinger]

Oh, poor Paxton. First he was booed when he left the field and now this.

[stessier]

If this is a penalty on the Defense, I'm not sure how they are supposed to stop anyone.

[pr0ner]

That is a terrible flag.

[RunningMn9]

I would love to hear the head of officials explain what the defender was supposed to do here. I get that his head was ever so slightly down. And maybe his helmet was the first thing to make contact. But it didn’t look like the crown of the helmet. It looked like the side of the helmet. If you are leaning into a tackle, that’s what is going to happen. And if you aren’t leaning into the tackle you aren’t going to make the tackle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jaymann]

Face it, the Chargers are unstoppable!

[ImLawBoy]

I would love to hear the head of officials explain what the defender was supposed to do here. I get that his head was ever so slightly down. And maybe his helmet was the first thing to make contact. But it didn’t look like the crown of the helmet. It looked like the side of the helmet. If you are leaning into a tackle, that’s what is going to happen. And if you aren’t leaning into the tackle you aren’t going to make the tackle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

It's going to be a learning experience for both the players and the refs. The cause is good, so hopefully they'll get better as we get into the regular season and everyone gets more experience with the new rules.

Sent from my computer where I'm typing in front of the TV.

[Jeff V]

It's going to be a learning experience for both the players and the refs. The cause is good, so hopefully they'll get better as we get into the regular season and everyone gets more experience with the new rules.

Sent from my computer where I'm typing in front of the TV.

I think you might be a little optimistic as to rate of adoption. Remember, in some cases you're trying to retrain players to change techniques they may have been using for decades. Training players to look at the sky rather than the person they are tackling might cut down on certain injuries, but it's sure going to be an ugly game to watch. Excessive penalties will also make it less watchable, and if they start fining players, eventually the union will get involved.

Eventually you're going to see complete minimization of contact (grab a flag, anyone?) And we'll have finally found a reason to watch rugby.

[ImLawBoy]

It's going to be a learning experience for both the players and the refs. The cause is good, so hopefully they'll get better as we get into the regular season and everyone gets more experience with the new rules.

Sent from my computer where I'm typing in front of the TV.

I think you might be a little optimistic as to rate of adoption.

I don't think you know anything about my assumptions as to the rate of adoption. I hope it will be relatively quick, but I fear it will take a while.

Remember, in some cases you're trying to retrain players to change techniques they may have been using for decades. Training players to look at the sky rather than the person they are tackling might cut down on certain injuries, but it's sure going to be an ugly game to watch. Excessive penalties will also make it less watchable, and if they start fining players, eventually the union will get involved.

Eventually you're going to see complete minimization of contact (grab a flag, anyone?) And we'll have finally found a reason to watch rugby.

So what's your suggestion? Different rule changes? Ignore the threat of CTE? Something else? Remember, you're exceedingly unlikely to make changes to rules/equipment/whatever that will have an immediate positive impact. I know sports internet and sports radio and the like thrive on complaining about anything and everything, but in the real world there are going to be a lot of challenges and misfires as you try to figure out how to battle concussions and CTE.

[Pyperkub]

Yellow cards, then red cards, as well as an accumulation rule. At least for the first year. The kicking a player out is a bad rule.

[stessier]

Episode 2 of Hard Knocks was on last night. I really like Tyrod Taylor. Him having to tell Hue Jackson to show everyone the tape to get them to practice harder was good for Taylor and bad for Hue. Might have just been a bad edit, I guess.

Hue having Callaway get up and apologize to everyone like it was grade school - that was weird, right?

[Jeff V]

So what's your suggestion? Different rule changes? Ignore the threat of CTE? Something else? Remember, you're exceedingly unlikely to make changes to rules/equipment/whatever that will have an immediate positive impact. I know sports internet and sports radio and the like thrive on complaining about anything and everything, but in the real world there are going to be a lot of challenges and misfires as you try to figure out how to battle concussions and CTE.

If there is a solution, it will be technology and why would it not have an immediate, positive impact? If someone today came out with a light-weight concussion-proof helmet and body armor; you don't think the league would do what it can to implement it as soon as it can?

If that doesn't happen, then I think you'll find the NFL suffers the fate gladiators did when they switched to non-lethal nerf swords. Lambeau Field will fall into ruins just like the Colosseum of Rome.

[LordMortis]

I'm fairly certain they need to come out with concussion proof brain, skull, and brain juices set. There's a point where 2" of brace can only slow down going from 10 yards a second to zero yards a second so much, isn't there? After that, it's all how the brain absorbs the rest of slow down.

[Jeff V]

I'm fairly certain they need to come out with concussion proof brain, skull, and brain juices set. There's a point where 2" of brace can only slow down going from 10 yards a second to zero yards a second so much, isn't there? After that, it's all how the brain absorbs the rest of slow down.

It's a matter of shock absorption. There are materials now that can do that, although some, like the stuff of bike helmets, are designed to be one-and-done when it comes to an impact. I don't think anyone wants to sit through helmet swaps between each play. I'm thinking also along the lines of structures meant to keep satellites from breaking up on impact with a planet (or other hard surface). As part of a full-body armor suit, I suppose it could be possible to dissipate the force of impact across a wider area.

Don't they have engineering competitions around designing something that can keep an egg from cracking when dropped from some challenging height? The winners of such competitions ought to be turned loose on this problem.

[The Meal]

The secret of shock absorption is lots of room (crumple zone, sway space, etc.). So what you need, are comically oversize helmets with lots of room to cushion the blow. (Or exterior helmet padding, leading to the swap-every-play motif.) I think you're right and technology is going to be the NFL's out on this one, but only coupled with a fan-reducing attenuation-of-violence. It'll all be a matter of where that line gets drawn.

[LordMortis]

The secret of shock absorption is lots of room (crumple zone, sway space, etc.). .

That's my not so math of physics understanding. Essentially you are diffusing the nearly instantaneous 10 yards per second to 0 zero yards per second spreading it out to a decelerating from 10 yards a second to 0 yards per second over the length of two inches and that's the absolute best you can hope for. You don't really have the means to transfer brain swoosh, "oof!" from outside the casing... Now... if create a better spinal fluid...

[Jeff V]

The secret of shock absorption is lots of room (crumple zone, sway space, etc.). So what you need, are comically oversize helmets with lots of room to cushion the blow. (Or exterior helmet padding, leading to the swap-every-play motif.) I think you're right and technology is going to be the NFL's out on this one, but only coupled with a fan-reducing attenuation-of-violence. It'll all be a matter of where that line gets drawn.

I sometimes wonder if limiting player size might have a positive impact, but then I remember 30 years ago players in general were much smaller (The Fridge was an anomaly...today he'd be average) and Duerson still went off his nut. But perhaps a combination of the two would help - better technology, and reducing impact to that of a Prius vs. a half-ton pickup thanks to smaller players.

[Jeff V]

The secret of shock absorption is lots of room (crumple zone, sway space, etc.). .

That's my not so math of physics understanding. Essentially you are diffusing the nearly instantaneous 10 yards per second to 0 zero yards per second spreading it out to a decelerating from 10 yards a second to 0 yards per second over the length of two inches and that's the absolute best you can hope for. You don't really have the means to transfer brain swoosh, "oof!" from outside the casing... Now... if create a better spinal fluid...

Bike helmets are not oversized and can sustain quite a shock (I can attest by experience). I think more exotic materials will be able to achieve this without having giant bobbleheads on the field. Also, remember I am suggesting complete body armor -- think something along the lines of an exoskeleton that disperses shock along it's entirety. Bear in mind though this is just a random suggestion from the sidelines - people like Meal have the engineering expertise to know what can and can't be done (but things change in the future and what's implausible now might be canon down the road).

[RunningMn9]

Y’all need to read “Why Things Bite Back: The Revenge is Unintended Consequences”.

The short of it is that increasing protective equipment will increase injuries not reduce them. The only way to reduce injuries is to alter the nature of the impact, which is the goal of the rule.

See what you are hitting so that the crown of your helmet isn’t initiating contact. I don’t have a problem with that goal, I have a problem with throwing a flag when the player does what he’s supposed to do, and the defender adjusts into the crown of the helmet (while trying to protect themselves).

[Jeff V]

So you are suggesting we'd all be better off driving ancient cars with no safety features? Adjusted for volume, I'm not sure statistics would concur.

[ImLawBoy]

So what's your suggestion? Different rule changes? Ignore the threat of CTE? Something else? Remember, you're exceedingly unlikely to make changes to rules/equipment/whatever that will have an immediate positive impact. I know sports internet and sports radio and the like thrive on complaining about anything and everything, but in the real world there are going to be a lot of challenges and misfires as you try to figure out how to battle concussions and CTE.

If there is a solution, it will be technology and why would it not have an immediate, positive impact? If someone today came out with a light-weight concussion-proof helmet and body armor; you don't think the league would do what it can to implement it as soon as it can?

The point is that this mythical technological breakthrough is not here yet, and who knows when it will be here. So should the NFL do nothing with the rules to try to minimize the impact of head trauma until your breakthrough comes through?

The secret of shock absorption is lots of room (crumple zone, sway space, etc.). .

That's my not so math of physics understanding. Essentially you are diffusing the nearly instantaneous 10 yards per second to 0 zero yards per second spreading it out to a decelerating from 10 yards a second to 0 yards per second over the length of two inches and that's the absolute best you can hope for. You don't really have the means to transfer brain swoosh, "oof!" from outside the casing... Now... if create a better spinal fluid...

Bike helmets are not oversized and can sustain quite a shock (I can attest by experience).

The impact of five or ten bike accidents over a 20 year period (just spitballing here) is nothing compared to the dozens of head impacts in a single game. From my reading, the biggest contributor to CTE isn't single impact incidents - it's the repeated smaller head impacts that occur as a matter of course in the game. Sure, the big concussions are problematic and speed up the process of acquiring CTE, but you can get CTE without suffering any concussions. A bike helmet that helps out twice a year when you wreck isn't comparable to the technology needed for the dozens of head impacts in three hours a week (plus practice). You're protecting against different things - a handful of head impacts in bike riding vs. hundreds or thousands during a football career. The rule changes are intended to limit not just the major impacts, but also the minor ones (knowing that complete elimination is likely not possible).

[Jeff V]

I just pointed out from a material standpoint that it is possible to protect against massive damage using bike helmets as an example. A bike helmet is a one-and-done thing, if involved in an impact, you throw it away. It's done it's job. Obviously, this is not practical for a football helmet. But you need to start somewhere. A helmet that eliminates concussions most certainly will substantially reduce smaller impacts so accumulation is less of an issue. I don't think looking at just the helmet is the right way to go, I think you need to look at a full-body solution (which would have an additional positive effect of reducing overall injury).

[ImLawBoy]

The bike helmet isn't the point. While I think there is probably an interesting discussion around whether a bike helmet provides better one impact protection than a football helmet, that's really irrelevant to my point. My point is that this technology you posit doesn't exist yet. Until it does exist, what should the league do to address head trauma? They're trying a rules based approach now, and you don't like how it's being implemented. I suggested that maybe if we give it some time it will get better because both players and officials are still learning it. You don't seem to agree. So while we wait impatiently for full body armor that eliminates injuries without any unintended consequences, what should the NFL do to address head trauma? Different rule changes? Nothing and just wait it out?

[El Guapo]

I think an all robot football league is the answer.

[Jeff V]

ILB, my point is the NFL ought to be pouring major research dollars into this, or partnering with government technology pioneers such as NASA. If they are not willing to go all out in coming up with a technology solution, then why not go straight to non-contact flag football rather than a cavalcade of penalties the game is becoming? They are going to be hemorrhaging viewers by putting a broken product on the field. Attempting to retrain players to employ ineffective tackling techniques will fix nothing. At the NFL level, instinct is as ingrained as technique.

[ImLawBoy]

So let's assume for argument's sake that the league is putting appropriate dollars into research to find a technology approach. It's not going to be ready for the start of the season. So what, if anything, should the league do until it's ready?

[Jeff V]

So let's assume for argument's sake that the league is putting appropriate dollars into research to find a technology approach. It's not going to be ready for the start of the season. So what, if anything, should the league do until it's ready?

Why do anything if it's not going to be effective anyway but destroy the brand? It's like Papa John's hosting a news conference and trying to decide whether to talk about how much their owner hates black people or that the meat on their pizza comes from rodents. If those are your choices, then why bother?

[Isgrimnur]

I think an all robot football league is the answer.

[ImLawBoy]

So let's assume for argument's sake that the league is putting appropriate dollars into research to find a technology approach. It's not going to be ready for the start of the season. So what, if anything, should the league do until it's ready?

Why do anything if it's not going to be effective anyway but destroy the brand? It's like Papa John's hosting a news conference and trying to decide whether to talk about how much their owner hates black people or that the meat on their pizza comes from rodents. If those are your choices, then why bother?

Except the bad publicity from CTE is also harming the brand. Fewer kids are playing football. Adults with moral issues over supporting and cheering for brain damage are starting to tune out (I'm not there yet, but it's on my mind). So is it worth trying to find a rules based interim solution that will have some potential impact on brain injury (even if it's obviously not perfect) and that won't completely ruin the product as you fear, or nah - fuck it? Because I don't think the league lawyers are going to let them keep playing under old rules now that risks are so well known.

[El Guapo]

I think an all robot football league is the answer.

Exactly.

We could also all play Hungry Hungry Hippos while we're waiting for the NFL to sort this out.

[Jeff V]

We could also all play Hungry Hungry Hippos while we're waiting for the NFL to sort this out.

My kids approve of this repurposing of Sunday afternoons.

[LordMortis]

I think an all robot football league is the answer.

<3 I always wanted that game but never had a system that could play it.

Cyberball (サイバーボール Saibābōru) is an Atari Games arcade game of 7-man American football, using robotic avatars of different speeds, sizes, and skill sets set in the year 2022.

We're only four years away!

[RunningMn9]

They are going to be hemorrhaging viewers by putting a broken product on the field.

No, they aren’t. They have had preseason games this year with higher ratings than championship games in other sports. Football is still killing it and generating record revenue for teams. I’ve seen the new flag thrown 5 times in the two games I watched this week. It was warranted all 5 times. Stop lowering your head and spearing people. It’s not complicated.

[Jeff V]

[Stop lowering your head and spearing people. It’s not complicated.

You haven't been watching games, have you? They are calling the most incidental contact, real or imagined. It's a shit show so far and will just be worse once the games count.

[Pyperkub]

The secret of shock absorption is lots of room (crumple zone, sway space, etc.). So what you need, are comically oversize helmets with lots of room to cushion the blow. (Or exterior helmet padding, leading to the swap-every-play motif.) I think you're right and technology is going to be the NFL's out on this one, but only coupled with a fan-reducing attenuation-of-violence. It'll all be a matter of where that line gets drawn.

I sometimes wonder if limiting player size might have a positive impact, but then I remember 30 years ago players in general were much smaller (The Fridge was an anomaly...today he'd be average) and Duerson still went off his nut. But perhaps a combination of the two would help - better technology, and reducing impact to that of a Prius vs. a half-ton pickup thanks to smaller players.

This is a huge factor in the issue. The players are bigger, stronger and faster, all of which are make the collisions a LOT more violent (forceful, for you physics folks).

Force=Mass*Acceleration

Player mass is up roughly 30% per player since the 80's and they are playing at higher accelerations.

[Pyperkub]

So what's your suggestion? Different rule changes? Ignore the threat of CTE? Something else? Remember, you're exceedingly unlikely to make changes to rules/equipment/whatever that will have an immediate positive impact. I know sports internet and sports radio and the like thrive on complaining about anything and everything, but in the real world there are going to be a lot of challenges and misfires as you try to figure out how to battle concussions and CTE.

If there is a solution, it will be technology and why would it not have an immediate, positive impact? If someone today came out with a light-weight concussion-proof helmet and body armor; you don't think the league would do what it can to implement it as soon as it can?

If that doesn't happen, then I think you'll find the NFL suffers the fate gladiators did when they switched to non-lethal nerf swords. Lambeau Field will fall into ruins just like the Colosseum of Rome.

I think we're approaching this from the wrong angle. What is needed is a way to both evaluate the hits which actually can cause lasting damage and provide immediate feedback to both players so that the players can get better at mitigation themselves through positive feedback.

Flags and bans for the game aren't the way. Sensors and a few plays off to evaluate all aspects of the hit may be the best way, as well as realistic tackling simulators.

For both offensive and defensive players.

[RunningMn9]

You haven't been watching games, have you? They are calling the most incidental contact, real or imagined. It's a shit show so far and will just be worse once the games count.

I feel pretty confident saying that I watch more football than anyone else here. During the preseason I generally watch most of every game each week. During the regular season I watch 7 live games per week. You're a crotchety old curmudgeon that literally complains about everything, so forgive me if I don't take your word for it. In week 1, I definitely saw a number of calls that shouldn't have been made (SEE: my posts above about one of the calls that clearly shouldn't have been made).

That was Week 1 of the preseason, with the refs calling the rule at live speed for the first time in games where players were playing under the rule for the first time. Literally all of the calls for that flag that I've seen this week were not only legit calls, they probably would have been called last year. The best example I can think of was the Jets defender that got called for it like three times (and somehow wasn't ejected). The first call, he clearly lowered his eyes to the ground (exposing the crown of his helment as the probably first point of contact), and then launched up into Colt McCoy's chin, helmet first. That's a penalty all day long, and it should be. The second call was later in the game where he did the same thing and launched into the side of the Redskins offensive player.

It got called again last night in the Bills/Browns game, against the Bills, and it was a totally reasonable call. Three Bills stacked the Browns WR up, and then some third string asshole flew in head first to deliver the kill shot. 15 yard penalty.

The problem isn't that defenders have to overcome decades of being taught how to tackle one way. I've taught kids to tackle, and I've watched kids learn how to tackle from 8 years old up to 18 years old. They aren't having to overcome a life time of different tackle instruction. They simply have to overcome a lifetime of wanting to be on Sportscenter. Or having to please the occasional asshole coach like Gregg Williams.

Head up, see what you are hitting (so you don't miss the tackle completely like and asshole), lead with the shoulder and wrap up. As a bonus, it's vastly safer for the tackler to tackle how they were taught as well.

Of course none of that was my point. My point was that your assertion that somehow people are going to stop watching the NFL is absurd. Consider this. Notice the pattern?

People talk about ratings being down, but they always fail to offer the context. TV ratings are down for *everything*. The NFL crushes everything else. In 2017, when shitbags like Trump were crowing about the ratings drop for the NFL, what was failed to mention was that of the Top 10 primetime broadcasts in the key 18-49 demo, 7 of the top 10 broadcasts were NFL games (including the top 6).

The NFL has seen some viewership drops, which triggered plenty of hand wringing about the potential reasons – including some who would blame the drop on players protesting police brutality. But the real root cause may be a bit more obvious: The overall continued decline of linear television ratings, as viewers find more choice and more abilities to watch TV elsewhere.

I work in an office where 16 of us share a space. There's probably 8 serious NFL fans in the group. Half of them don't have any kind of TV subscription that can be tracked as "ratings". They all watch 4 or 5 NFL games per week through digital means (they are all 30-ish or younger).

The point is simply that the NFL doesn't have a revenue problem. It doesn't have a viewership problem (if you believe that, look at the money they are bringing in for the rights to stream shitty Thursday Night games). And this rule change isn't going to cause any kind of problem at all. Why? Because coaches hate 15-yard defensive penalties. So they will coach it out of the players, and as the season wears on, you will see that, along with the refs easing up on any borderline calls. The only caveat to that is that this year in particular there was a lot of ref turnover, so as a whole the games might be a little less smooth due to that while these crews come up to speed. The NFL will be fine.

As an aside, while I understand that some people are concerned about the long-term health impacts to players, and that makes them hesitant to watch. I am concerned about hiding the long-term health impacts to players. If everyone is honest about the risk, and players determine that the compensation justifies taking the risk, then I don't care at all. I care about the older players who are suffering, because they weren't given that information. They didn't make a calculated risk. And they weren't really compensated that well anyway.

As another aside, there are definitely issues at the youth level - but there are a lot of changes there that are helping. Focusing on safety issues, delaying contact until after middle school (although there are still plenty of tackle leagues going down to the 8 and 9 year old levels), etc.

[RunningMn9]

Just saw a call from the Vikings/Jags that clearly wasn’t justified. That’s the sort of thing they have a few more weeks to clean up. It will get worked out.

[ImLawBoy]

Just saw a call from the Vikings/Jags that clearly wasn’t justified. That’s the sort of thing they have a few more weeks to clean up. It will get worked out.

It will get *mostly* worked out, but not completely. The refs will still screw things up on occasion. I'm OK with that if the rule has a positive impact on brain trauma and they get it right more often than not.

(I only point this out even though reasonable people already know it because if you state something in absolutes like this, Jeff will come in after the first missed call and tell us about how the game of football is now just a pillow fight.)

[RunningMn9]

It will get *mostly* worked out, but not completely. The refs will still screw things up on occasion. I'm OK with that if the rule has a positive impact on brain trauma and they get it right more often than not.

(I only point this out even though reasonable people already know it because if you state something in absolutes like this, Jeff will come in after the first missed call and tell us about how the game of football is now just a pillow fight.)

There are human beings involved and the game is hard to officiate in real-time. Mistakes will be made. But by and large we'll mostly just stop seeing people dropping their head and spearing people. And we'll occasionally get annoyed when the defender does everything right and they still get flagged. Like when there are flags for pass interference that didn't happen. Or no flag for clear pass interference. It happens. We'll survive, and the NFL will continue to make even more money.

[noxiousdog]

Just saw a call from the Vikings/Jags that clearly wasn’t justified. That’s the sort of thing they have a few more weeks to clean up. It will get worked out.

I didn't think the one in the 49ers/Texans game (called on the 49ers, so not biased) was justified. (2:00 left in the 2nd quarter)