jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (7 posts)

Do you believe that the NFL is in the right to fine so many defensive players re

  1. thebeast02 profile image86
    thebeast02posted 6 years ago

    Do you believe that the NFL is in the right to fine so many defensive players recently for big hits?

    Do you believe that the NFL is justified in its decision to fine so many players recently, for what they consider "illegal hits"? Yet the rules are very blurry on this subject.

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/5432213_f260.jpg

  2. thebeast02 profile image86
    thebeast02posted 6 years ago

    I agree 100% with fines and even suspensions for intentional helmet-to-helmet hits. As far as the other "defenseless receiver" rulings, I believe the Commissioner needs to form a council to look over each incident individually. There is no secret that many people watch the NFL to see the big hits. The NFL has even aired commercials spotlighting some of the massive shots. There seems to be a double standard here and it needs to be addressed. Your thoughts?

  3. ajbisons profile image61
    ajbisonsposted 6 years ago

    The NFL is trying to become a safer environment because they don't want to deal with players suing them. Blows to the head are major issue for retired players and the NFL wants to help solve the problem

  4. Nickalooch profile image90
    Nickaloochposted 6 years ago

    i agree to some extent. but i also think that all the rule changes have gotten out of hand. It's catering to much to high powered offenses, and makes it a few steps away from becoming flag football.

    Helmet to Helmet hits were bad last year, there were alot of them, but alot of the time they are incidental. James Harrison is the only one that i believe that tries to kill people on the field.

  5. DJProfessorK profile image60
    DJProfessorKposted 6 years ago

    @ajbisons

    You bring up an interesting point. When players sign a contract, it is implied that there is risk involved. The risk of bodily harm is high but that's football.

    There should be an adequate retirement fund in place, but aside from that those retired players should have no right to sue.

    If almost all athletes must sign a contract pertaining to the dangers, then they should be held to account by it.

  6. profile image0
    erikjohnsonposted 6 years ago

    This is a fine line.  Football is a violent sport.  And it should stay that way.  Could you imagine Ronnie Lot not being able to hit people.  He would be 1/2 as popular.  I do agree they need to control the helmet to helmet hit.  And they need to have rules to better protect players.  But I have seen some calls that were just plain poor.  Plus the fans want to see the hits.....and they are the ones that really pay the salaries.

  7. optimus grimlock profile image60
    optimus grimlockposted 6 years ago

    to a certain extend yes but there goin to far. The thing is most players dont look at how there life will be 20-30 years later in life, if they did they would change there technique.

 
working