Should the NFL let players police themselves on the field more?

[jrober38]

The public isn't ready to watch NFL players brawl on the field. 

 

If the NFL wants to clean up the game they need to strip off the pads and let these guys punish their bodies without helmets and shoulder pads to use as weapons. 

 

None of these helmet to helmet hits would happen if the guys doing the hitting weren't wearing helmets. 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

6 hours ago, BuffaloBill said:

No way.... I think this whole concept would ruin the game.  We’ve forgotten the entire notion of sportsmanship in this discussion.  Instead we want a vigilante system?

 

The NFL already has violence, away from the field, issues and a CTE problem.  Allowing for fights pn the filed will likely only serve to make both of these worse.

 

In the Gronk type situation the league needs to step in harder.  It was an intentional act that may put a player out of one or more games due to a concussion.  If the league is serious about the concussion protocol they should have ejected him from the current game and suspended him for a longer period to include as many games as the injured player misses.  

 

Keep in mind the players have a union that will likely fight any actions taken by the league.  I’m guessing there are rules or standards of punishment that come into play.

 

 

 

....absolutely agree.......they have somewhat "attempted" to crack down on hits of defenseless players...and some of these minions STILL don't get it.....take that away and you'll see Daryl Singley repeats weekly....Gronk should have been a minimum of three......they play was over and he launched from behind......hell even Belichick apologized......NHL has clamped down on bench clearing brawls and has tried to curtail fighting....only major sport not to put forth much of an effort is MLB......bench/dugout clearing skirmishes cannot be stopped?...seriously?......brush back pitches are one thing but obvious bean balls get a tiny wrist slapper?.....maybe their Stingley Day is in the cards before they wise up.....

Edited December 5, 2017 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[Dablitzkrieg]

If you let this happen, I really have no doubt that we will all witness the death of a player on the field.  This is insane thinking

[BillsFan130]

4 minutes ago, Dablitzkrieg said:

If you let this happen, I really have no doubt that we will all witness the death of a player on the field.  This is insane thinking

Lol a death on the football field will result from a cheap shot like a flagrant hit to the head or a freak accident like shazier last night.

 

My point was to minimize those hit to the heads/cheap shots by letting them tussle a bit.

 

A little tussle won't be the thing that would kill an NFL player... It will be the cheap shots in which we saw a few examples of last night

Edited December 5, 2017 by billsfan11

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, billsfan11 said:

Lol a death on the football field will result from a cheap shot like a flagrant hit to the head or a freak accident like shazier last night.

 

My point was to minimize those hit to the heads/cheap shots by letting them tussle a bit.

 

A little tussle won't be the thing that would kill an NFL player... It will be the cheap shots in which we saw a few examples of last night

 

The problem is that a "little tussle" could lead to all out war in the event that the sidelines ever cleared. 

 

There is far too much downside to allow any type of fighting in a league where the players have firm footing on the ground (no skates). 

[Dablitzkrieg]

Just now, billsfan11 said:

Lol a death on the football field will result from a cheap shot like a flagrant hit to the head or a freak accident like shazier last night.

 

My point was to avoid those hit to the heads/cheap shots by letting them tussle a bit.

 

A little tussle won't be the thing that would kill an NFL player... It will be the cheap shots in which we saw a few examples of last night

I hear what you are trying to say, but disagree.  The behavior on the field now, with the rules is gross.  Prime example was last night's game.  While you are suggesting "a little tussle", how often do these remain little?  Think about what you are asking.  It sounds dumb

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, billsfan11 said:

Lol a death on the football field will result from a cheap shot like a flagrant hit to the head or a freak accident like shazier last night.

 

My point was to minimize those hit to the heads/cheap shots by letting them tussle a bit.

 

A little tussle won't be the thing that would kill an NFL player... It will be the cheap shots in which we saw a few examples of last night

 

.....yes, absolutely.......the officiating corp does one helluva job with the 2,675 page rule book containing 14,852 rules that you now want them to serve AS WWE stripers?.....fire Goodell and hire Vince McMahon......let the show begin......Eddie Guns vs Big Show........grudge match.....

[BillsFan130]

5 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

.....yes, absolutely.......the officiating corp does one helluva job with the 2,675 page rule book containing 14,852 rules that you now want them to serve AS WWE stripers?.....fire Goodell and hire Vince McMahon......let the show begin......Eddie Guns vs Big Show........grudge match.....

Not what I'm saying at all as I thought I made that pretty clear in my original post

11 minutes ago, Dablitzkrieg said:

I hear what you are trying to say, but disagree.  The behavior on the field now, with the rules is gross.  Prime example was last night's game.  While you are suggesting "a little tussle", how often do these remain little?  Think about what you are asking.  It sounds dumb

What's more dumb to me is the constant head shots these guys do to eachother to get payback.

 

4 to 5 tussels a game sounds alot more safe then 2 to 3 hits like Smith Schuster put on Burfict last night. Those hits are built up frustrating because they are not allowed to police themselves, and the NFL will refuse to suspend these good players for long periods of time on top of it

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

4 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Not what I'm saying at all as I thought I made that pretty clear in my original post

 

 

...I know what you're saying.....and what I'm saying is give players an inkling of NASCAR's "have at it boyz" and then try to keep that from spiraling out of control.........

[Chris66]

Nfl would love that. What a dumb idea.

[BillsFan130]

Just now, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

...I know what you're saying.....and what I'm saying is give players an inkling of NASCAR's "have at it boyz" and then try to keep that from spiraling out of control.........

You can implement rules to make them stay in control. 

1 minute ago, Chris66 said:

Nfl would love that. What a dumb idea.

Thanks for your input bud! Very insightful

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

6 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

You can implement rules to make them stay in control. 

Thanks for your input bud! Very insightful

 

 

.....I think there have been one or two posts (HUGE COUGH) about officiating quality and CURRENT rules......just curious as to how you see them being able to handle even a minimal semblance of "player self-policing" without it being a detriment to the game and borderline anarchy.....and NO I'm NOT trying to be a smart azz.....just trying to get a better understanding of what you are proposing and the ramifications, both plus and minus..........

[BillsFan130]

Just now, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

.....I think there have been one or two posts (HUGE COUGH) about officiating quality and CURRENT rules......just curious as to how you see them being able to handle even a minimal semblance of "player self-policing" without it being a detriment to the game and borderline anarchy.....and NO I'm NOT trying to be a smart azz.....just trying to get a better understanding of what you are proposing and the ramifications, both plus and minus..........

Fighting a little may sound ridiculous, but how come it works well in hockey? Why couldn't it work in football? I know there are more players on the field, but the principle remains the same.

 

For one, if there is a one on one little fight, if a 3rd player comes into that fight then give that player an automatic ejection and suspension.

 

That is literally at the top of my head one way to minimize big brawls. I'm sure if I spent some time on it, I could come up with simpler/better ideas.

 

There will for sure be games where it gets out of control as it does in hockey, but most of the time in hockey, the self policing works very well. 

 

Somy question is, why couldn't it work in football? And once again, I'm not talking about taking the helmet off and throwing punches

[Chris66]

17 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

You can implement rules to make them stay in control. 

Thanks for your input bud! Very insightful

Think about this. A bunch of 260 plus men wearing essentially body armour. All your going to end up with is a bunch of broken hands.

[BillsFan130]

Just now, Chris66 said:

Think about this. A bunch of 260 plus men wearing essentially body armour. All your going to end up with is a bunch of broken hands.

Not talking about throwing punches.

 

And in hockey they drop the gloves and have even more armour. So I'm not sure I understand your point

[Chris66]

2 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Not talking about throwing punches.

 

And in hockey they drop the gloves and have even more armour. So I'm not sure I understand your point

In hockey the men are half the size. Not to many 325 lb guys.

Besides the entire idea in hockey is that they do drop the gloves. How else would you police it with more dirty hits?

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

3 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Fighting a little may sound ridiculous, but how come it works well in hockey? Why couldn't it work in football? I know there are more players on the field, but the principle remains the same.

 

For one, if there is a one on one little fight, if a 3rd player comes into that fight then give that player an automatic ejection and suspension.

 

That is literally at the top of my head one way to minimize big brawls. I'm sure if I spent some time on it, I could come up with simpler/better ideas.

 

There will for sure be games where it gets out of control as it does in hockey, but most of the time in hockey, the self policing works very well. 

 

Somy question is, why couldn't it work in football? And once again, I'm not talking about taking the helmet off and throwing punches

 

...my friend, it is hard for me to quantify my answer or comment without knowing how long you have been following hockey and my question IS BY NO MEANS an insult.....insults are not my style..I've been a hockey guy since the 60's.....going back to that era as well as the 70's and 80's, fights were the "norm"...bench clearers were the epitome (LOL)....the Flyers in the 70's were known as the "Broad Street Bullies" for just that.....I had season tix for years along with 12 others for the AHL Amerks (Pegula now owns them as  the Sabres farm club in Rochester).....we knew by the opponent who would be fighting when to "settle old scores and wounds"....hockey for me TODAY is a FAR different game from those eras...it's alomst "flag hockey" today versus that era as you would say the NFl is now "flag football" with QB protectionism..........

[BillsFan130]

58 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...my friend, it is hard for me to quantify my answer or comment without knowing how long you have been following hockey and my question IS BY NO MEANS an insult.....insults are not my style..I've been a hockey guy since the 60's.....going back to that era as well as the 70's and 80's, fights were the "norm"...bench clearers were the epitome (LOL)....the Flyers in the 70's were known as the "Broad Street Bullies" for just that.....I had season tix for years along with 12 others for the AHL Amerks (Pegula now owns them as  the Sabres farm club in Rochester).....we knew by the opponent who would be fighting when to "settle old scores and wounds"....hockey for me TODAY is a FAR different game from those eras...it's alomst "flag hockey" today versus that era as you would say the NFl is now "flag football" with QB protectionism..........

Played and watched hockey my whole life.

 

I'm Canadian, hockey is my life lol.

 

You're right that it's not comparable to the olden days. But policing themselves in hockey still happens alot

 

[The Now Moment]

You really think the league would allow that?  We are trying to get less violent and allowing players to sort it out...isn't going to lower injuries.  I think they need to up the suspensions if they really want to make a difference.  There is no place in the game for the crap that gronk and others have done this week.  Absolute garbage.  I don't really care if it was part of the older league, the league is changing and has changed.  

 

Gronk should've gotten 2 games suspension and a third game equivalent fine.  I don't want to see fighting on the field and I don't think the owners do either

[Chris66]

Can you imagine Alan Branch and Eric Wood throwi down.. That would be kind of funny when you think about it

Edited December 6, 2017 by Chris66

[Punching Bag]

9 hours ago, BuffaloBill said:

Keep in mind the players have a union that will likely fight any actions taken by the league.  I’m guessing there are rules or standards of punishment that come into play.

 

The union is more interested in preventing players from being suspended than trying to protect the players who follow the rules. 

[Rochesterfan]

11 hours ago, billsfan11 said:

I was talking with a few posters about this yesterday regarding what they should have done to Gronk after the cheap shot he put on White.

 

A few posters said cheap shot him back next game, and I disagreed with that as I said they should have clocked Gronk one and even tussled with him right after the hit.

 

Now a poster brought up that fighting is illegal in the NFL and results in an ejection, which is true. Which leads me to my next point. Why doesn't the NFL loosen up on that rule a bit and let the players police themselves a bit more?

 

I am not saying take off the helmets like hockey and throw haymakers, but let them tussle for a little bit and let them defend themselves or their teammates.

 

I made the example yesterday that Hockey has the best policing system in any sports. You hit someone dirty? You are going to have to fight the person like a man and own up to it.

 

If Hockey didn't have fighting, I really think people would be going around slashing people's hands, or taking head shots, or just doing anything dirty to try to get that payback. They don't need to do that though because fighting allows them to police the game outside of the officials.

 

A prime example was last nights game. Smith Schuster smoked Burfict in the head, and then Cinci comes back and drills Antonio Brown in the head when he scores the TD. Almost like an eye for an eye type of deal.

 

The players are not allowed to police themselves in the NFL and this is where head shots come in, and pretty much anything else dirty will come in.

 

Like I said, I am not saying go full out hockey and take the helmets off and scrap. But maybe give them a little more freedom to defend themselves and their teammates. And if they do initiate the tussle, give them a 10 yard penalty or something, just like you would get an instigator penalty in Hockey.

 

Thoughts about this?

 

 

 

 

Absolutely not.  The NFL unlike the NHL actually ejects and suspends players for these thing.  The NHL does a poor job policing hits and now they have very little in the way of retribution- so players get away with cheap hits all the time with very little to show for it.

 

First - I think the league needs to keep at it and get even a bit harsher, but more importantly the Union needs to step up and support suspensions rather than fighting them.  The union does more damage to their own cause by always siding with the player getting suspended and fighting it even when it is something egregious against another union member.

 

 

[reddogblitz]

4 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

...only major sport not to put forth much of an effort is MLB......bench/dugout clearing skirmishes cannot be stopped?...seriously?......brush back pitches are one thing but obvious bean balls get a tiny wrist slapper?.....

 

That's because it's a very rare exception for a punch thrown by a haseball player to actually land. It's mostly guys keeping other guys from getting in on it (which they ain't gonna do anyway).

[BillsFan130]

3 hours ago, Buffalo30 said:

You really think the league would allow that?  We are trying to get less violent and allowing players to sort it out...isn't going to lower injuries.  I think they need to up the suspensions if they really want to make a difference.  There is no place in the game for the crap that gronk and others have done this week.  Absolute garbage.  I don't really care if it was part of the older league, the league is changing and has changed.  

 

Gronk should've gotten 2 games suspension and a third game equivalent fine.  I don't want to see fighting on the field and I don't think the owners do either

No I don't think they would allow it, it was just an idea I had.

 

The injuries and brain injuries are at an all time high now.

 

What is there to lose? Even if a little scuffle can prevent one major head injury through the year , that would be a win.

 

I'll tell you one thing. The system they have now? It ain't working

[BillsFan130]

1 hour ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

 

Absolutely not.  The NFL unlike the NHL actually ejects and suspends players for these thing.  The NHL does a poor job policing hits and now they have very little in the way of retribution- so players get away with cheap hits all the time with very little to show for it.

 

First - I think the league needs to keep at it and get even a bit harsher, but more importantly the Union needs to step up and support suspensions rather than fighting them.  The union does more damage to their own cause by always siding with the player getting suspended and fighting it even when it is something egregious against another union member.

 

 

Exactly, they throw ejections if you throw one punch, but you only get a 15 yard penalty (at most) if you smoke the guy in the head. Do you not see the problem there? This is what I'm trying to say.

 

Answer me this. What is more dangerous in your opinion...

 

Having a little fight with no punches to settle a dispute? Or to go head hunting when you're trying to get even with someone?

 

And I disagree with your comments about the NHL. There of course will be cheap shots as there are 31 teams times 82 games each. But all things considered, the fighting at least minimizes those cheap shots

[The Now Moment]

22 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

No I don't think they would allow it, it was just an idea I had.

 

The injuries and brain injuries are at an all time high now.

 

What is there to lose? Even if a little scuffle can prevent one major head injury through the year , that would be a win.

 

I'll tell you one thing. The system they have now? It ain't working

See the thing is, you expect a "little fight"...the steelers and bengals aren't gonna have no "little fight."  Rivalries aren't gonna have little fights.  It will be a brawl.  Maybe not every time, but if you allow it...it will blow up into big fights.  Not a good idea at all in my opinion.  Wouldn't protect head injuries.

[Sweats]

I seriously think any guilty culprit should get a time-out............go sit in the corner and think about it.

 

And then everyone can have cake and candy at the end of the game cause everyone wins and gets a participation ribbon.

[Rochesterfan]

6 hours ago, billsfan11 said:

Exactly, they throw ejections if you throw one punch, but you only get a 15 yard penalty (at most) if you smoke the guy in the head. Do you not see the problem there? This is what I'm trying to say.

 

Answer me this. What is more dangerous in your opinion...

 

Having a little fight with no punches to settle a dispute? Or to go head hunting when you're trying to get even with someone?

 

And I disagree with your comments about the NHL. There of course will be cheap shots as there are 31 teams times 82 games each. But all things considered, the fighting at least minimizes those cheap shots

 

That is bull - maybe 20 years ago in hockey, but there are more cheap shots in hockey than most sports and the players do very little about it.  You see guys get hit in the head and knocked flying or slew footed into the boards and the players do nothing.  Guys hit defenseless players in the back and drill them into the boards and 5 minutes later 2 uninvolved players drop the gloves that does nothing - very rarely does the actual player involved get anything more than a glove to the face as players mill about.

 

Later in the season a different player will take a run a the original player because the league did nothing and then you get these guys getting injured.  It is dangerous and does nothing to police themselves because there are no lines or code.

 

Therefore my question is do you want more Gronk like moves - because that move is exactly what you are advocating - a player taking care of a perceived slight (Gronk complains - I was being held trying to justify his actions) - or the league handling it.

 

If the league and the players union worked together on this and Burfict had been suspended 4 or 5 games originally- then you see these things stop.  Since the union fights all suspensions - the league gives smaller suspensions and you get more retribution.

 

Additionally in football - you have 11 players of different sizes on the field and after each play several players come on and off the field - so fights can suddenly get out of hand quickly and as there is little to separate fans - if you allow fights - I could see an NBA situation where fans decide to take some vigilante justice if the fight escalates.

 

I think fighting in hockey has become a useless part of the game and if you watch minor league or European/International hockey a former part of the game - it is not missed and there are no more cheap shots taken there than in Pro Hockey.  

 

[BillsFan130]

2 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

That is bull - maybe 20 years ago in hockey, but there are more cheap shots in hockey than most sports and the players do very little about it.  You see guys get hit in the head and knocked flying or slew footed into the boards and the players do nothing.  Guys hit defenseless players in the back and drill them into the boards and 5 minutes later 2 uninvolved players drop the gloves that does nothing - very rarely does the actual player involved get anything more than a glove to the face as players mill about.

 

Later in the season a different player will take a run a the original player because the league did nothing and then you get these guys getting injured.  It is dangerous and does nothing to police themselves because there are no lines or code.

 

Therefore my question is do you want more Gronk like moves - because that move is exactly what you are advocating - a player taking care of a perceived slight (Gronk complains - I was being held trying to justify his actions) - or the league handling it.

 

If the league and the players union worked together on this and Burfict had been suspended 4 or 5 games originally- then you see these things stop.  Since the union fights all suspensions - the league gives smaller suspensions and you get more retribution.

 

Additionally in football - you have 11 players of different sizes on the field and after each play several players come on and off the field - so fights can suddenly get out of hand quickly and as there is little to separate fans - if you allow fights - I could see an NBA situation where fans decide to take some vigilante justice if the fight escalates.

 

I think fighting in hockey has become a useless part of the game and if you watch minor league or European/International hockey a former part of the game - it is not missed and there are no more cheap shots taken there than in Pro Hockey.  

 

I disagree with pretty much all of what you said to be honest. I can assure you hockey players still police themselves. Not as much as the old days but to say it doesn't happen is false. I watch hockey almost every single night and have been my whole life.

 

You are comparing apples and oranges in regards to the no fighting in European leagues. Europeans were taught the game very very differently opposed to the North American way. There is basically no contact in those leagues either, where the north american game is way more physical.  They don't fight cause most of them don't know how to. If you find european hockey more appealing to watch then you are more than welcome to watch those leagues. I'll for one will watch the NHL for many reasons, including the physical nature of the game.

 

Once again of course there will be cheap shots as I said. There are 31 teams who play 82 games a year with lots of testosterone. Even non contact sports like soccer have cheap shots. Absolutely impossible to avoid it.

 

The Gronk hit is literally what I'm proving buddy. That is not a fight... That is a cheap shot. I think it's you who is advocating more moves like that not me. My solution is let them have a scuffle for 5 to 10 seconds to minimize those dirty plays. 

 

Basically the difference between the NFL and NHL here is this. The NFL suspends and ejects for fighting and will barely suspend for cheap shots. The NHL allows fighting and cracks down hard on cheap shots. 

 

The result? A lot more cheap shots in the NFL!! And brain injuries for that matter. And hockey is a very physical game which is even faster so can't even say football is much more violent

[BillsFan130]

10 hours ago, Buffalo30 said:

See the thing is, you expect a "little fight"...the steelers and bengals aren't gonna have no "little fight."  Rivalries aren't gonna have little fights.  It will be a brawl.  Maybe not every time, but if you allow it...it will blow up into big fights.  Not a good idea at all in my opinion.  Wouldn't protect head injuries.

You may be right about it being a brawl. There would have to be rules to make sure it is strict on those things.

 

And I'm not saying it would protect head injuries but I think it could help. Like I said before, how much worse can It get? 

 

I much more agree with the NHL's stance opposed to the NFL's.

 

The NHL allows fighting and cracks down big time on cheap shots.

 

The NFL doesn't tolerate fighting but they allow cheap shots to a certain degree. You get what, a game and a 15 yard penalty at most if you intentionally drill the guy in the head?

 

Like I said, I much prefer how NHL handles things. I think it's safer 100 percent

[The Now Moment]

2 hours ago, billsfan11 said:

You may be right about it being a brawl. There would have to be rules to make sure it is strict on those things.

 

And I'm not saying it would protect head injuries but I think it could help. Like I said before, how much worse can It get? 

 

I much more agree with the NHL's stance opposed to the NFL's.

 

The NHL allows fighting and cracks down big time on cheap shots.

 

The NFL doesn't tolerate fighting but they allow cheap shots to a certain degree. You get what, a game and a 15 yard penalty at most if you intentionally drill the guy in the head?

 

Like I said, I much prefer how NHL handles things. I think it's safer 100 percent

I completely disagree.  The NFL is a completely different game.  While in hockey, yes, players can hit other players and check and all that good stuff.  Tackling the other person in the NFL is an absolute necessity, checking is not.  You are on a bigger stage of physicality in the NFL.  

 

You have bigger players who can hit harder in the NFL.  Try letting 300 pound men that hate each other sort things out themselves...plus it's tough to fight on skates.  All they can really do is throw a few punches.  The players in the NFL don't have that restriction, it'd be a brawl. The NFL is way more physical of a sport to be messing around with allowing the players to fight a little.  

 

The NFL is way way more violent and when you let the players emotions dictate a "little fight," you are playing with fire.  No offense at all but it would be a horrible idea.  

[BillsFan130]

14 minutes ago, Buffalo30 said:

I completely disagree.  The NFL is a completely different game.  While in hockey, yes, players can hit other players and check and all that good stuff.  Tackling the other person in the NFL is an absolute necessity, checking is not.  You are on a bigger stage of physicality in the NFL.  

 

You have bigger players who can hit harder in the NFL.  Try letting 300 pound men that hate each other sort things out themselves...plus it's tough to fight on skates.  All they can really do is throw a few punches.  The players in the NFL don't have that restriction, it'd be a brawl. The NFL is way more physical of a sport to be messing around with allowing the players to fight a little.  

 

The NFL is way way more violent and when you let the players emotions dictate a "little fight," you are playing with fire.  No offense at all but it would be a horrible idea.  

No offense taken. I didn't expect too many people to agree with me as I know it is an outside the box idea. We'll agree to disagree. Thank you for your comments

[The Now Moment]

Just now, billsfan11 said:

No offense taken. I didn't expect too many people to agree with me as I know it is an outside the box idea. We'll agree to disagree. Thank you for your comments

I just don't think it'd work in the NFL.  The NFL is under a huge spotlight that the NHL isn't.  

 

Also, I find it refreshing that we can have conversation without tossing insults at each other.  There is hope haha.  Thank you 

[BillsFan130]

1 minute ago, Buffalo30 said:

I just don't think it'd work in the NFL.  The NFL is under a huge spotlight that the NHL isn't.  

 

Also, I find it refreshing that we can have conversation without tossing insults at each other.  There is hope haha.  Thank you 

Hahaha exactly man. No insults needed as i respect your opinion. And you may be right that it may not work. I'm just throwing out ideas cause the NFL seems like a mess right now in terms of cheap shots/brain injuries