In today's edition of Around the Pound, we take a look at some of the proposed NFL rule changes, Terry Pluto's weekly digest on the Browns, some insight as to why the Ravens went after WR Donte Stallworth, and more.
These rule changes have been discussed before, but the Washington Post highlighted them again on Saturday. The primary objective of the proposed rule changes would be to limit the rate and severity of concussions. Here is a bullet point summary of the article...
The first three rule changes could be implemented as soon as next season, but the last one probably would not be put into place just yet.
Throughout his career, WR Donte Stallworth has made his success off of being a one-year wonder for multiple teams. He had a great year in New Orleans in 2005. In 2006, he was solid for Philadelphia. In 2007, he wasn't bad for New England. Then, with the Browns in 2008, Stallworth received a big-time contract which included $10 million guaranteed. We got nothing in return for that $10 million except for anguish.
Because of Stallworth's baggage and one-year absence, the Ravens were able to take a shot at Stallworth for a much cheaper price ($900,000), and odds are that he will quadruple his production from his reign with the Browns.
The Ravens are hoping Stallworth is a new man who still has playmaking abilities. They’re in desperate need of a No. 3 receiver and, in the back of their minds, they might be hoping that the 28-year-old Stallworth can push Mark Clayton for a starting job.
In the offseason, it's been fun to reflect back on the Browns' special teams. That's what Terry Pluto did in his Sunday column after interviewing Browns special teams coach Brad Seely. Seely had nothing but praise for his players, including snapper Ryan Pontbriand:
"He really is an all-pro long snapper. Nearly every snap is exactly where you want it, directly on the punter's hip so he can just catch the ball and punt it with no wasted motion. He also is a very good blocker. We want our punts to take no more than 2.3 seconds from snap to kick, and we hit it nearly every time. Ryan has good velocity on his snaps, as well as accuracy."
Seely did point out the unit's one downfall: when Pontbriand's snap bounced off of S Nick Sorensen and was recovered in the end zone by the Kansas City Chiefs for a touchdown. Maybe I missed the explanation the first time around, but Seely claims that Pontbriand snapped the ball prematurely because he thought he caught the Chiefs with 12-men on the field. Check out Pluto's piece for more of Seely's praise for players like Joshua Cribbs, Phil Dawson, and Alex Hall.
Over at our Indianapolis Colts blog, Stampede Blue, there is praise for rufio's breakdown of Tracy Porter's pick six of Peyton Manning in the Super Bowl.
At first glance you are like, "What the hell? Another dumb post about this friggin' interception!" Then, after a closer look, you see that the story is not yet another misguided hate post from a writer dancing with manic glee at the fact that Peyton Manning lost a Super Bowl. Instead, we get a story that provides us with what many other stories from supposedly better writers have not: Insight.
UPDATE: There is some praise over at Canal Street Chronicles too, our New Orleans Saints blog.
0 recs | 51 comments
Donte Stallworth: the worst Browns free agent signing since Andre Rison? (Thanks again Savage.)
TheDriveStillHurts - February 21, 2010
LeCharles Bentley, anyone?
sww2109 - February 22, 2010 via mobile
I can’t fault a GM for an injury that was not the result of pre-existing conditions. It could be viewed as the worst based on realized value (and without looking it up, how much were they out after netting insurance proceeds, if applicable, from the guaranteed money?), but not by the judgment used.
rolub - February 22, 2010
Exactly.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 22, 2010
Jeff Garcia was worse than Rison.
North Coast Flea - February 28, 2010
they better never get rid of the three point stance.
notthatnoise - February 21, 2010
Why?
The Brown Note - February 21, 2010
You get more momentum from a three point stance. The rule will be designed to cut down on trench concussions.
SpecialBrownie - February 21, 2010
Link
Chris Pokorny - February 21, 2010
a lot of players that aren’t linemen
notthatnoise - February 21, 2010
What’s a three point stance?
emily522 - February 21, 2010
Linemen can either have three extremities touching the ground at pre snap or two.
Three point – two legs, one hand
Two point – Two legs
SpecialBrownie - February 21, 2010
sometimes you see defensive linemen with both hands down, this is usually done by nose tackles or other interior linemen, and is called (you guessed it) a four point stance.
notthatnoise - February 21, 2010
Way to be a douche.
SpecialBrownie - February 21, 2010
How was he trying to be a douche?
Chris Pokorny - February 21, 2010
The “you guessed it” line slightly irked me. “Douche” may have been a little heavy.
SpecialBrownie - February 21, 2010
I’m sorry, I really wasn’t trying to come off that way at all. I just thought if people were confused about the different types of stances it couldn’t hurt to explain a four point stance. the “you guessed it” line was there because i felt like after explaining the stance it should be pretty obvious what it was called, given the definition of 2 and 3 point stances.
notthatnoise - February 22, 2010
You didn’t come off that way — seemed like a normal thing to say. Can’t believe it got the reaction it did. Weird.
TheDriveStillHurts - February 22, 2010
Chill out.
TheRealSlimShady - February 22, 2010
Ok, thanks.
emily522 - February 22, 2010
Where do I start? Football helmets are designed to protect players’ heads. It would only be a matter of time before players learned how to use a helmet as a weapon.
Concussions at the line of scrimmage: Either improve the helmet or ban football. The line of scrimmage has to have violent collision or the linemen wouldn’t be trying hard enough.
I’ve noticed the expansion of rules protecting players from injury. The only reason we needed these rules are that players and coaches figured out how to injure players and felt fine using these strategies.
If football participants focus on injuring each other as a strategy, there will be so many rules that there will be flags every other play and football will go the way of boxing. Face it, the human body was never built to take the kind of punishment that 360 lb behemoths inflict on each other. Then, when you train these people to attack parts of the body that are vulnerable to injury with a hard weapon like a helmet, it becomes more like warfare than football.
I’ve always been a huge fan of pro football, but I see now that it has evolved into the type of activity that resembles “Rollerball”. It’s sad that we as people couldn’t contain ourselves.
elsandito - February 21, 2010
How about considering banning the helmet altogether?
Here’s an article addressing that very question: Is it time to retire the football helmet?
Basically, the helmet makes players more risk adverse, and thus more prone to injury. Also, as you said, the helmet is often used as a weapon.
Western Reserve - February 21, 2010
Oo yeah! Like rugby! Note that there are no 350 pound rugby players though.
Eliminates the risk of players using helmets to tackle. However, I’ve seen people get knocked out from knees to the head.
skipkirk - February 22, 2010
If you watch leather helmet football, people rarely used their head at all other than thinking. The advancements of the helmet is what has brought us to the “headhunting” era.
SpecialBrownie - February 22, 2010
I honestly like the roster exemptions. honestly this is the only thing that makes sense.
I don’t like the idea of banning the 3 point stance. I don’t even think it would reduce lineman concussions significantly.
on the helmet to helmet with running backs, I understand the idea but its hard to not do it when a RB is running at you using his head almost like a battering ram. many running backs lower their head and get low (lower center of gravity). the thing is, if they put themself in the position to do that, then they make themselves liable for helmet to helmet collisions.
Also, I do not feel that we should limit practices. I do NOT want to see the league practice in summer camp like crennel does. at least the league probably won’t make craft time mandatory.
the point is, if players practice light, then they won’t be used to playing hard in game situations when the regular season starts. I understand the idea of not wanting to hurt players, but if a team practices light like they are suggesting, it is likely that teams will come out sluggish and not at game speed. It would just diminish the quality of football played.
bross09 - February 21, 2010
I think I agree with you completely here. I don’t like the limited practice rule because I think it should be up to the coaches. Combine this rule with decreased preseason games and say hello to a lot of bad football early in the year. Blech.
Legoman0721 - February 21, 2010 via mobile
yeah…I just feel a lot of the things Goodell is doing will dilute football completely…combine that with an 18 game season…at the beginning it will be bad football, by the end they might end up looking sluggish. I don’t even want to imagine what it would be like after 18 regular season games, the playoffs, and then the super bowl…
bross09 - February 22, 2010
Pads and Helmets should be banned in my opinion. Other than maybe foam shoulder pads worn under a jersey. Pads make a person MORE likely to engage in risky behavior. I play rugby for the Cleveland Rovers, we wear zero pads. When we work on tackling drills we work on form. We don’t go for the most brutal hit possible, but the best way to bring the ball carrier to the ground. We still hit hard, we still try and punch the ball out or strip it, and we still make the tackle. And guess what, our rate of injury is alot lower than football players.
Lisol - February 21, 2010
rugby is a totally different game though. the types of dangerous situations in football are different from the situations you get in during a rugby game. you’re also not playing with 350 pound players or players with elite athletic ability, so you aren’t dealing with people that big and strong moving that fast.
notthatnoise - February 22, 2010
Tell the people playing 6 Nations Rugby they aren’t playing with elite talent. I myself might not be playing with elite talent, but during the typical 6 Nations (and other Euro professional league matches) the incidence of injury appears to be much lower.
http://ajs.sagepub.com/content/31/6/954
The total exposure time during this study was 4876 player-hours (winter, 2386, summer, 2490). The relative risk of injury doubled after the move from winter to summer. Winter rugby accounted for 72 injuries, and summer rugby, for 150 injuries.
If someone could find a similar study for NFL football that would be great. I couldnt find one.
Yes, the average rugby player is smaller than the average football player. But every player is in peak physical condition and the average rugby player is probably faster than the average NFL football player, just because of the nature of the game itself.
If you havent cleaned up a ruck against two 250+ pound props then you dont know jack about dangerous situations. Or conversely being cleaned up while setting a ruck by a 250 pound man moving full speed.
NFL hits are harder only because play stops once the tackle is made. In rugby you have to make the tackle and stand up and continue playing, so you dont want to hurt yourself or throw yourself on the ground far away from the action.
Lisol - February 22, 2010
i meant you weren’t playing against peak athletic opponents. I understand professional and international rugby players are probably comparable to most nfl players, but as you said yourself, the situations are much different.
sure, if we took away modern helmets, players wouldn’t hit as hard, but there would still be plenty of head injuries and the pace of the game would be drastically changed. part of the fun of football is you don’t have to pull up on a hit.
notthatnoise - February 22, 2010
If people use the helmet as a weapon, they are more likely to get hurt themselves. See what you hit.
Eliminating the three point stance is stupid.
rufio - February 21, 2010
Advances in technology aren’t always a good thing, as said in my leather helmet comment above.
SpecialBrownie - February 22, 2010
you can’t ignore the vast difference in athletic ability from that era to this one though. the best solution is emphasizing the fundamentals of tackling. as rufio said, see what you hit.
notthatnoise - February 22, 2010
This.
Back in the “olden days” players didn’t possess the size or speed of todays NFL players.
Hall of Fame Center and LB Mel Hein was 6-2 225.
I am guessing that if Mel Hein was hit at full speed by Mario Williams 6-6 290, it would be ugly.
Bernie19Kosar - February 22, 2010
Rufio, that’s exactly how I was taught. A good tackle usually involves putting your facemask ( not the the top of your head) right on the football, if possible. This has all sorts of good side effects, like more forced fumbles.
I like the roster exemption rules, but I don’t like the idea of banning a three point stance. That would eliminate interior defense as well as a running game. We might as well play 7 on 7.
Legoman0721 - February 21, 2010 via mobile
maybe thats what goodell wants…
bross09 - February 22, 2010
One problem with banning helmet
On hard surfaces or late in the year on a frozen field- you get tackled/knocked down, whatever, and your head hits the surface. You could very well see someone DEAD.
burmafrd1944 - February 22, 2010
Is this one of those games where you get everyone laughing uninhibitedly hysterically, and then if you can´t stop totally seriously completely all of a sudden, based on just one person´s whim, your life would irreconcilably altered for the worse?
mooncamping - February 22, 2010
My suggestions
1) soft exterior of the helmet- no hard surface.
2) every player has a helmet fitted for him so that there is no slop.
burmafrd1944 - February 22, 2010
I have always assumed that the NFL already did fit helmets to each player. Heck, we did that in high school. It wasn’t perfect, but they didn’t just randomly hand out helmets. I’ve always thought that the NFL teams have always had helmets fitted specifically to each player’s head. Seems like common sense to me.
Legoman0721 - February 22, 2010 via mobile
Yeah um excuse me if I don’t feel sorry for professional athletes who get injured. Yeah I don’t want anyone to get several concussions and such but this is rediculus. NFL players nowadays are making obscene amounts of money, the kind of money that no labor is actually worth. The reason they are payed so much is because they are putting their body on the line in a violent game.
Lets face it, football is a war game, its violent, strategic, and dangerous. Trying to slow the pace and decrease the violence of the game might as well reach in its chest and tear out its heart. Players who make more money in a year than I’ll make in a lifetime can handle some injury risk.
Furthermore, what the nfl doesn’t need right now is any more reason for the officials to get involved in the game. The officials already are throwing flags for ticky tac calls on the quarterback’s knees and such (thanks tom brady, we cant have the white smile multimillion dollar face of the nfl get injured now can we). The very point of the pass rush is to hit the quarterback and wear him down, or even knock him out of the game, so long as the hits are clean. The league is becoming more and more an offensive game centered around quarterback play because the defense has been more and more constrained by needless rules.
Do we really want the gridiron to end up like basketball, where the referees have so much command of the action and what is and what isn’t a foul can vary from game to game or minute to minute?
If the nfl outlaws the three point stance why not just get rid of the interior lines altogether and play 7on7?
The NFL shouldn’t be looking for ways to prevent concussions by making the sport less violent, the NFL should be doing what it should have been doing all along: Providing a decent pension and benefits to the retired players who played in the time when football players didn’t make absurd amounts of money. It is those old retired players who need the NFL to look in on them, because they didn’t have the benefit of fantastic wealth and cutting edge medical staffs to protect their wellbeing.
jaws. - February 23, 2010
the one thing I have to comment about…
yeah. whenever tom brady screws up, the NFL cannot have that so they make a rule to help him.
bross09 - February 23, 2010
Kinda agreed with everything till the last paragraph.
Concussions can lead to mental dysfunctions. It’s not worth fighting in the trenches for 10 years and then living on wheels the rest of their lives. What good is money for people who are permanently disabled?
skipkirk - February 23, 2010
Are you serious? You don’t think the NFL should be trying to prevent concussions? Just throw a bunch of money at players who get injured and hope that makes up for all their mental and physical problems they have in their life? That has to be a joke.
No amount of money can make up for physical and mental injuries. The NFL should be doing everything they can to prevent concussions and improving the well-being of their players. I can’t believe you wrote that.
Buckeye Brad - February 23, 2010
Its part of the risk when they sign the contract. They are getting compensated more than fairly for the risks involved. NFL players are compensated much more richly than the soldiers in Iraq who are risking even more bodily harm for a paycheck.
Bottom line: if you have the talent and you want to make a fantastic (or at least very good) living playing in the NFL, there are risks involved. That’s why guys like Tiki Barber get backup career plans and get out before they get too mangled.
jaws. - February 24, 2010
The benefits to retired players are sorely lacking.
Especially considering the average length of careers in the NFL.
rufio - February 24, 2010
Whose idea was it to have a Tiger Woods only blog on SBN?
gahnki - February 23, 2010
Tiger Woods.
skipkirk - February 23, 2010
Haha. Well done.
Western Reserve - February 23, 2010
Ha!
emily522 - February 24, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.