Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

NFL Random Thought of the Day

Tashaun Gipson didn’t work out here (I blame OB) but he has been quite the success story as a UDFA. 12 seasons in the league and he’s been starting for every team he’s been on since year 2. Started in the super bowl for the 49ers this year.

An extremely underrated player. One of the best UDFAs of this era.
 
Thorn said:
Football is a violent sport that results in serious injuries all the time. It's just what happens. But the more you tone down the sport, the closer it becomes to flag football, which nobody wants. That's a really tough delima. Expect the NFL to continue, very slowly though, at toning down the violent and potentially dangerous hits.
Click to expand...
Regarding toning down the sport. I've heard players say that they rather get hit high than low. It seems that to protect from concussions, tackling has now become diving at players legs and it's leading to more knee and leg injuries that shorten careers.

I'm not sure the NFL is always considering the unintended consequences when they tone down the sport.
 
TheRealJoker said:
Tashaun Gipson didn’t work out here (I blame OB) but he has been quite the success story as a UDFA. 12 seasons in the league and he’s been starting for every team he’s been on since year 2. Started in the super bowl for the 49ers this year.

An extremely underrated player. One of the best UDFAs of this era.
Click to expand...
I totally blame OB. When healthy, Gipson was a good, productive player here. In his final season here, he had a broken wrist and then was playing through a fracture in his lower back.

For some idiotic reason, OB and the coaching staff played him in the last game of the season and he reaggravated the lower back injury and was lost for the playoffs. It was especially dumb because they lost that game 35-14 and still won the division.

Report: Texans place Tashaun Gipson on IR with back injury (usatoday.com)
 
Thorn said:
Football is a violent sport that results in serious injuries all the time. It's just what happens. But the more you tone down the sport, the closer it becomes to flag football, which nobody wants. That's a really tough delima. Expect the NFL to continue, very slowly though, at toning down the violent and potentially dangerous hits.
Click to expand...
Ruining a once fine game.
 
Thorn said:
Football is a violent sport that results in serious injuries all the time. It's just what happens. But the more you tone down the sport, the closer it becomes to flag football, which nobody wants. That's a really tough delima. Expect the NFL to continue, very slowly though, at toning down the violent and potentially dangerous hits.
Click to expand...
While I don't like a lot of the rule changes it seems to me that the NFL's hands are somewhat tied. This did not happen in a vacuum. It's not like the NFL just started changing rules for the hell of it. It was only after losing somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.2 billion dollars in the concussion settlement that they got serious about cutting down on concussions. A lot of the players complaining about the rule changes now will be lining up for their share of the concussion pie after they are out of football. It is definitely a damned if do & damned if you don't situation.
 
mws said:
While I don't like a lot of the rule changes it seems to me that the NFL's hands are somewhat tied. This did not happen in a vacuum. It's not like the NFL just started changing rules for the hell of it. It was only after losing somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.2 billion dollars in the concussion settlement that they got serious about cutting down on concussions. A lot of the players complaining about the rule changes now will be lining up for their share of the concussion pie after they are out of football. It is definitely a damned if do & damned if you don't situation.
Click to expand...

Yep, so how do you cut down on injuries in a sport that features huge men running into each other at full speed? I don't like seeing players hurt, but it's an inevitable part of the game. The players are highly compensated for taking this risk though. It would be interesting to see what the game looks like in 20 years, but I doubt I'll live that long to see it. And if I do live that long, I doubt I'll still be watching football. LOL
 
Earl34 said:
I totally blame OB. When healthy, Gipson was a good, productive player here. In his final season here, he had a broken wrist and then was playing through a fracture in his lower back.

For some idiotic reason, OB and the coaching staff played him in the last game of the season and he reaggravated the lower back injury and was lost for the playoffs. It was especially dumb because they lost that game 35-14 and still won the division.

Report: Texans place Tashaun Gipson on IR with back injury (usatoday.com)
Click to expand...

Just another player screwed by the OB regime. Makes me wonder how JJ’s career would have played out with a different coach. Thinking of past his peak when he kept getting injuries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
Earl34 said:
I totally blame OB. When healthy, Gipson was a good, productive player here. In his final season here, he had a broken wrist and then was playing through a fracture in his lower back.

For some idiotic reason, OB and the coaching staff played him in the last game of the season and he reaggravated the lower back injury and was lost for the playoffs. It was especially dumb because they lost that game 35-14 and still won the division.

Report: Texans place Tashaun Gipson on IR with back injury (usatoday.com)
Click to expand...
TheRealJoker said:
Just another player screwed by the OB regime. Makes me wonder how JJ’s career would have played out with a different coach. Thinking of past his peak when he kept getting injuries.
Click to expand...
Just aside comments................The fracture of his back was a fracture of the transverse process (one of the wings of the vertebra) of the vertebra, not the structural vertebra per se. It is an injury that limits function because muscle spasm PAIN. Many players will return 2 weeks post injury, when the pain is subsiding and moderately controlled with injections and medications. Gipson missed 2 games, but had 3 weeks of rehab since the week following the 2 missed was the Bye. There is no danger for further injuring the vertebra by playing through the pain. There is of course the risk of compensatory injuries due to any limitations the player may have during the pain. The actual reason for his being placed on IR was the wrist fracture he sustained in week 17.
 
Lawsuit from former players against NFL’s disability plan will proceed
By Mike Florio
Published March 22, 2024 07:45 PM

The NFL gets sued all the time. It rarely faces trial. It could face trial in a case brought by former employees against the league’s disability plan.

Via ESPN.com, a lawsuit on behalf of 10 former players against the plan will proceed to the discovery process. The case accuses officials who run the disability program of bad faith and other violations of applicable federal law.

Lawyers representing the players accused the league of “systemic injustice.”
“We look forward to continuing to shine a light on this betrayal by the NFL, holding the [disability] plan fully accountable and correcting this broken system so it is fair for players moving forward,” lawyers Chris Seeger and Sam Katz said in a statement.

The plaintiffs are Willis McGahee, Eric Smith,Mike McKenzie, Jason Alford, Daniel Loper, Jamize Olawale, Alex Parsons, Charles Sims, Joey Thomas, and Lance Zeno.

Smith explained his lingering brain trauma in a videoconference last year.

“There were times I would black out and wake up . . . and I’m bleeding, there are holes in the wall,” Smith said at the time. “My wife and kids are crying. I went down a dark path.”

The case will now move down a path toward trial. It still has a long way to go to get there.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Just aside comments................The fracture of his back was a fracture of the transverse process (one of the wings of the vertebra) of the vertebra, not the structural vertebra per se. It is an injury that limits function because muscle spasm PAIN. Many players will return 2 weeks post injury, when the pain is subsiding and moderately controlled with injections and medications. Gipson missed 2 games, but had 3 weeks of rehab since the week following the 2 missed was the Bye. There is no danger for further injuring the vertebra by playing through the pain. There is of course the risk of compensatory injuries due to any limitations the player may have during the pain. The actual reason for his being placed on IR was the wrist fracture he sustained in week 17.
Click to expand...
I know injuries can occur at any time. But to play him in that meaningless week 17 game, lose him for the playoffs and then watch Mahomes and Kelce torch the secondary during their comeback is another great example of OB's shortsightedness.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JB
Chiefs trading CB Sneed to the Titans for meager consideration which is only a 2025 3rd round pick (+ a '24 7th rounder), so guess we didn't miss out on much ?
 
Kickoff proposal gets a touchback tweak

The proposed revolution to the kickoff rule has gotten a tweak, one day before the NFL’s owners will consider whether to adopt it for 2024.

Via Kevin Seifert of ESPN.com, the touchback for a ball kicked into or out the end zone will be the 30, not the 35.

It’s unclear whether a kick that fails to make it to the front of the landing zone (i.e., the receiving team’s 20) will also result in the drive starting at the 30 and not the 35.

The problem with making the touchback the 30 is that some teams, when faced with the prospect of kicking to a dangerous return specialist, will just bang the ball deep and concede the 30. Given that some teams might choose to use, say, a fast and explosive player like Tyreek Hill to return kicks given the dramatically reduced chance of a high-speed collision, some coaches might specifically opt for a touchback in lieu of giving a fast and elusive returner the chance to break a long run.

More tweaks could happen. With each tweak, however, comes a potential consequence. That makes it only more likely that the most prudent move will be to table the proposal until May, so that all tweaks can be suggested and fully considered before the idea becomes an official rule for the coming season.
 
Report: “Minimal traction” to allow challenges, reviews of penalties in final two minutes of halves
By Josh Alper
Published March 24, 2024 02:16 PM

A proposal to allow for replay reviews of all penalties in the final two minutes of both halves of games looks unlikely to become part of the rules for the 2024 season.

The Colts made a proposal that would allow coaches to challenge and replay officials to initiate reviews of such calls at that point in games. Under current rules, no penalties are reviewable and coaches are not permitted to challenge any calls in the final two minutes of halves. Only replay officials can trigger reviews in those situations.

Stephen Holder of ESPN reports that there is “minimal traction” for the proposed changes to game operations.

Holder says the impetus for the Colts’ proposal was their loss to the Browns during the 2023 season. A defensive holding call wiped out a Browns fumble that would have iced the game for the Colts and a pass interference call in the end zone set up Cleveland’s game-winning touchdown. Colts owner Jim Irsay said the NFL told him that the calls were incorrect.

The NFL had a one-year trial of making pass interference calls reviewable, but there has been no appetite for other proposals to allow penalties to be reviewed in recent seasons. This report indicates nothing has changed on that front.
 
Been saying this for a long time now.......

**************************************************
NFL is concerned about dip in scoring
Published March 24, 2024 01:54 PM

The numbers that matter most — money and TV ratings — are up for the NFL. There’s one number that is down that the league doesn’t like.

“Statistically, what gives us concern a little bit is scoring,” Competition Committee chairman Rich McKay said during a Thursday conference call.

“Scoring this year at 43.5 is still above an historical marker, which has kind of been that 43 mark. But we were at 49 points per game during COVID [in 2020], and we went to 45 [in 2021], we went to 43.76 [in 2022], and now we’re down to 43.54.”

McKay believes the proposed change to the kickoff will impact field position by 3-5 yards per drive, which will lead to more scoring. (He spoke of the revised kickoff as a done deal, and maybe it will be if the owners think it will result in more points.)

Some would say the league shouldn’t care about doing things to improve scoring. But that’s what the league has been doing since the ‘70s, when it realized that more yards and more points results in more excitement and more viewers. And more money.

Still, legalized gambling makes candor about a desire for more points a riskier proposition. Already, it appears that officials sometimes look the other way when it comes to offensive linemen leaving early and offensive holding. Officials at times are a little too flag happy with roughing the passer.

At what point does the failure to enforce the rules as written in order to enhance scoring undermine the integrity of the game? By admitting that the league wants more scoring, the league invites speculation that certain calls are made or not made in order to goose the scoreboard, not in order to get every call right.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Been saying this for a long time now.......

**************************************************
NFL is concerned about dip in scoring
Published March 24, 2024 01:54 PM

The numbers that matter most — money and TV ratings — are up for the NFL. There’s one number that is down that the league doesn’t like.

“Statistically, what gives us concern a little bit is scoring,” Competition Committee chairman Rich McKay said during a Thursday conference call.

“Scoring this year at 43.5 is still above an historical marker, which has kind of been that 43 mark. But we were at 49 points per game during COVID [in 2020], and we went to 45 [in 2021], we went to 43.76 [in 2022], and now we’re down to 43.54.”

McKay believes the proposed change to the kickoff will impact field position by 3-5 yards per drive, which will lead to more scoring. (He spoke of the revised kickoff as a done deal, and maybe it will be if the owners think it will result in more points.)

Some would say the league shouldn’t care about doing things to improve scoring. But that’s what the league has been doing since the ‘70s, when it realized that more yards and more points results in more excitement and more viewers. And more money.

Still, legalized gambling makes candor about a desire for more points a riskier proposition. Already, it appears that officials sometimes look the other way when it comes to offensive linemen leaving early and offensive holding. Officials at times are a little too flag happy with roughing the passer.

At what point does the failure to enforce the rules as written in order to enhance scoring undermine the integrity of the game? By admitting that the league wants more scoring, the league invites speculation that certain calls are made or not made in order to goose the scoreboard, not in order to get every call right.
Click to expand...
Just eliminate tackling altogether and that will increase scoring.

On another note, why do the owners keep changing the rules? The game was a great game before God'ells and the owners started playing with the rules.
 
The NFL is steadfast in their reasoning that smoking on a grass field is no less harmful that smoking a turf field. Therefore there is no need to convert all the turf stadiums to grass. :tiphat:

***************************************

NFL is committed to safety — when it doesn’t cost money to be
By Mike Florio
Published March 25, 2024 12:04 PM

As momentum was building over the weekend for a ban on the hip-drop tackle, a current head coach made an important observation.

Basically, as the league wraps itself in the “player safety” flag, it continues to ignore the basic fact that playing on grass is better for the human body than playing on an artificial surface.

It’s undeniable. The forces, on a grass field, go into the ground. On a turf field, they bounce back into the body. Anyone who has ever played on an artificial surface knows that. The NFL nevertheless tries to concoct a phony debate, and to bolster the pro-turf position with warped and misleading stats.

Frankly, the NFL supports safety only when it doesn’t cost any money to do so. And, alternatively, when it doesn’t get in the way of the ongoing obsession to maximize revenue.

Grass fields in all stadiums would create an expense that the league doesn’t want to incur, especially at a time when it’s pinching pennies with NFL Network programming and luring long-time employees to take buyouts and leave.

The NFL also will not hesitate to make the inevitable push for an 18-game regular season. That’s coming. It’s just a question of when. And when it does, it will result in more revenue. Regardless of whether it’s good for the players to play 18 regular-season games.

That’s a safety issue that doesn’t matter, because making it matter would mean making less money. Thus, look for any and all ongoing safety advancements to be made only as to items that aren’t hazardous to the health of Big Shield’s bottom line.
 
Porky said:
In other news, boxing has now outlawed punching and kickboxing has removed kicking.
Click to expand...
Boxing did go from 15-round championship matches to 12-round matches due to the death of South Korean boxer Kim Duk-koo in the 14th round of his WBA Title fight against Ray Mancini in 1982. Pre-fight check-ups also became more stringent for the fighters. In the years following Kim’s death, fighters were required to submit brain scans, electrocardiograms, and lung testing prior to fighting. There was a lot of talk about some states banning boxing. There is also a pretty strong movement wanting to go to 16 oz gloves instead of 12 oz.

The same thing happened to the UFC. In the first UFC event there were no weight classes & only three rules: no biting, eye gouging or groin strikes. Ultimate Fighting took a huge hit in 1996 when Sen. John McCain went on a crusade against MMA and was almost successful in getting the UFC banned in all 50 states.

In response to the backlash, the UFC began implementing more rules. This included judges, time limits, rounds, weight classes, and a 10-point must scoring system.

Most importantly, the UFC also made changes to the ways in which a fighter can strike his opponent. Combatants now wore fingerless gloves and were not allowed to headbutt, throw elbow strikes to the back of the head/neck or kick a downed fighter to the face.

This was not enough though as the UFC, teetered on the verge of bankruptcy. Few states were sanctioning events. They actually moved the venues out of the USA for a while

MLB implemented rule, 7.13, intended to increase player safety by eliminating "egregious" collisions at home plate.

They are all afraid of getting sued. Hell even the murderer Aaron Hernandez family tried to sue the NFL. The case was dropped in part because of the concussion settlement.
 
I'm interested in seeing how these rule changes impact the game. Probably not interested enough to watch anyone but the Texans, though.
 
I heard there was 100 of these so called tackles last year. That is about 1 every third game played in the NFL. This is a big nothing burger
 
Rich Schmidt said:
I heard there was 100 of these so called tackles last year. That is about 1 every third game played in the NFL. This is a big nothing burger
Click to expand...

I think a more problematic thing than just how many times did this happen last year, or in any given season, is how often does a completely innocuous tackle that looks very similar to the 'hip-drop' occur and how is that going to be ruled on the fly.

In other words sure, in hindsight there aren't that many of these that it should matter much. But in the heat of a game at full speed how often will there be questionable, or downright awful, calls because in real-time very many legit tackles can look completely similar to the now illegal 'hip-drop' tackle.
 
Mollywhopper said:
I think a more problematic thing than just how many times did this happen last year, or in any given season, is how often does a completely innocuous tackle that looks very similar to the 'hip-drop' occur and how is that going to be ruled on the fly.

In other words sure, in hindsight there aren't that many of these that it should matter much. But in the heat of a game at full speed how often will there be questionable, or downright awful, calls because in real-time very many legit tackles can look completely similar to the now illegal 'hip-drop' tackle.
Click to expand...
To be clear, I dont think the rule was needed. Refs are already awful calling a game and gives more chance to f up a game so wish they had not gone it. I don't really understand of all the things they should be discussing for the game, this is a useless distraction that could have some bad effects
 
The refs can't even call all the penalties that occur now, so what a great idea it'll be to add more penalties they'll miss. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top