Personally, I say everyone should keep hitting the quarterbacks and protest the rule. Hit them harder in fact. I know it goes in the face of winning, which is what the league is built on, but this is just wrong. Sometimes you have to go against convention to put things the way they should be.

I agree. If you can't hit a quarterback below the knees, then they also should adopt an immediate whistle rule upon first contact by a defender so that guys like Roethlisberger are not allowed to continue plays after escaping the grasp. Personally, I give the guy credit for being able to make those plays, but if you are going to limit defensive hits with this new rule, plays need to be blown dead as soon as a quarterback is touched to even things up for the defensive side.

Mike,

What were we to expect from a league that strives for weekly shootouts? If it were Jon Kitna, the NFL would have made a minor inquirey and nothing serious.

The league is about safety, but it should also use better judgement. The Brady and Palmer hits were the result of blockers throwing themselves in the way. The hits were accedential. Safety is one thing, patty caking the game is another.

People are up in arms about the "Hines Ward" rule. These are blows to the head. Head injuries can kill you, where leg injuries simply end your football career. I feel the latter pales in comparison.

Mike i couldn't agree more. This whole thing is a joke. By the way if any Qb besides peyton, and brady that would have gotten hurt we wouldn't even be having this discussion.They ought to just make it like flag football and give the qb flags.

Mike, I don't have a problem with this rule. It doesn't limit the defender that much. While a defender is on the ground, he can still lunge at a QB's thighs without having to spend the time getting up.

I do, however, think more discretion needs to be used when the QB's helmet is contacted. A mere brush (yes, I'm thinking of the Suggs-Collins play) should not be a penalty).

Mike,

Thank you. Thank You! THANK YOU!!!!

As players, we were taught from Pop Warner up to the collegiate level on how to tackle. Now, when you get into the NFL, you have to change your game because of the NFL being a QB driven league.

Cry-babies all........

Jim

PS - Are you the only who noticed that the NFL wanted the Colts to win they wildcard game against the Chargers?!?!? LOL

Mike,

I know owners want to protect their investments, but I think this stuff goes too far. I know some fans like to call the quarterbacks candy-asses, but it's the Bob Krafts and Jimmy Irsays making the decisions.

I'm aging myself, but I remember the mauling Johnny Unitas took at the hands of Doug Eggers, Bill George, and the rest of the Bears, particularly during the 1960 season. Y.A. Tittle sitting on the field with a bloody nose, and Chuck Bednarik standing over and taunting a clearly concussed Frank Gifford.

Those days are gone, my friend.

Break out those red flags that are attachable to waist band and let's call quarterback flag football and be done with it.

Mike,

Red jerseys, how demeaning. Just put them in dresses and be done with it.

I need to ask, does this eliminate all types of hits below the knee? If a quarterback is scrambling in the pocket, and the defender dives to trip him up by the ankles, is this, under the new rules, a penalty? If it is, the NFL should be disgraced.

Mike,

If they really want to protect the players, where were these changes when kyle was pretending, i mean playing QB. He took his fair share of "Unnecessary Roughness"

Even Patriots Safety Rodney Harrison was against this rule and predicted that Tom Brady would be too.

Remember the season before the horse collar tackle was banned? Pretty sure Musa Smith was injured that year by one of those tackles. But do you remember who else was injured by a horse collar tackle? Yep, you guessed it: the one and only Terrell Owens (the Eagles version). I wonder if that kind of tackle gets benned if its had just been Smith who was injured, and not Owens too. Based on what we've seen from the owners this off-season, probably not.

With it becoming more difficult to actually lay a lick on a QB, will we see more QB's running draws and option plays? I mean, one reason the option isn't seen is because you don't want to risk your QB and his salary. But last season, teams tried the option/wildcat looks, and showed that they can work. If you can't actually hit the QB without giving up an automatic first down after that 15 yard penalty, why not?!

I am shocked I am agreeing with you but the protection of the QB has gone to extreme. Does anyone think that the owners would be adopting new rules if it had been a Kyle Boller instead of Tom Brady that suffered the injury?

Forget the jerseys and the pads. I think all QB's should have to wear Tutu Skirts and Ballerina Slippers. Wouldn't Joe Flacco look great in that purple outfit!

I also think that whenever the QB leaves the pocket they should immediately start playing Dance Of The Sugar Plum Ferries over the stadium speakers.

Lastly, when the QB is actually hit the player making the hit has to grab the refs mic and immediately and publically apologize to the QB for the hit.

GOOD GRIEF!!!

Perhaps Jack Lambert was correct when he advocated putting skirts on QB's?

I agree 100% . The quarterbacks should be changed to Contact Down. Requireing a waist tackle on Big Ben is what makes his game. No more Scramble. Stand the quarterback in a protective box and if the defense touches the box play is over. Light goes on like a hockey goal. Allow the offensive line to hold it happens every play anyway.

That's why I don't play Madden anymore , I rather play NFL Streets more contact. Lol!!! NFL is a joke now.

The league is so paranoid about injuries to their QB's that eventually the QB's will be off limits to tackling but instead grab a flag he'll be required to have on his belt to stop the play . But what'll you do if he runs it ? Remember this is tackle football a contact sport and if you can't stand to see people getting injured then it's not your sport . Last Saturday we witnessed a woman's tackle football and some of those girls hit pretty hard and it was fun watching . My grand daughter was probably the hardest hitter and she'll be going to medical school in the fall so she's not a tough kid . The team is looking for players as they only fielded 18 players last week and their opposition from DC had 54 . Contact the Baltimore Blackhawks if you're interested .

So this may be the second time I ever agree with Milke Preston. The other wasy the TO idea! haha This is getting rediculous and really hurts the way the ravens play D. We will be getting flagged a lot this year for this....I hope! haha I wonder what the Goose is thinking. We might not have won the super bowl if we didnt take out Gannon and the other qbs to big hits!

Mike,

It is pretty simple to understand the new rule really:
Don't hit the QB below the hem of his skirt or anywhere where his bonnet touches his head.

What about a 10 Mississippi clock, palced right next to the play clock? You can even put a flashing red light on it so the lineman know when they can rush. You can even use it in replay to see if his shoelaced crossed the line of scrimage before the light went off.....CMON ITS FOOTBALL!!

Most of us agree that rule changes like this will eventually destroy the game but these things need to play out. Abraham Lincoln once said that the best way to have a bad law repelled was to enforce it strictly. I'm all for enforcing these bad rules strictly.

I remember hearing an interview with Jack Lambert where he stated they should just put dresses on QB that was about 30 years ago. I see nothing has been resolved.

As usual I disagree with you - the QB position in pro football is by far the most important - every play of every game of the season goes through that guy. They get hit all the time in an unprotected position, maybe from behind, often well after they've thrown the ball. Good ones are too important to let cheap shot artists have free shots at them.

What happens when the qb is running with the ball?Do we just push him down?I thought D guys are coached to get back up and go again after they hit the ground; called "hustling"?

Why not have a 3 second clock when the QB is between tackles. Much like basketball and the 3 second rule in the paint. LOL!

Okay so what exactly is a DL or a LB supposed to do when they're on the ground and their job is to pressure the QB? Nothing! This is crap their job is to pressure the QB and take him down!! Yeah I get the whole safety factor and everything but this is very unfair to defensive players!

It doesn't matter about rules in the NFL. The game vs. Tennessee last year where Terrell Suggs was called for "Roughing the Passer" when he virtually barely touched Kerry Collins.. cost the Ravens the game. In retrospect, it could have cost the Ravens the AFC North Title. It was a riduculous call then, and the league isn't doing anything to fix it. Then you can look to the AFC Championship game against the Steelers where the Ravens were called for Roughing the Kicker, when we never touched the kicker. The official didn't see the play (he couldn't have, because the foul didn't happen), he merely saw the kicker on the ground and Ravens player on the ground near him, and called the foul. I guess you don't need to see a play, just assume it happens now. That call made the differnce in the first half, as it was Pittsburgh driving to score before the half's end, vs. the Ravens driving to score. Petty and unjust calls. Changing the rules as they have done will only make matters worse...

In all actuality, this rule does not effect the game all that much. You are literally talking about 2-3 plays maximum during an entire game. That is less that 1 percent of the whole game. Plus, the rule states that if a player is down, he cannot lunge at the knees, rather above the knees. Do I think that the rule is bogus? Yes i do, because it takes away the instinctual nature of defensive players which is stop the guy with the ball at all costs. It is sort of difficult when you have a 300 lb lineman trying to keep you on the ground to not lunge for the knees of the quarterback. I mean if they have to have that rule, then offensive linemen should be mandated to start every play from a three point stance to even out the odds.

TOUGHNESS?

I am in the clear minority after reading over the responses above...

This has nothing to do with "toughness." Most anyone can dish out a hard lick on a ball carrier, receiver, and yes, a QB. The real "toughness" is accepting the hit while making the play (offensively) while knowing you are about to be laid out. Sorry, but when the QB is standing upright, to deliver the ball, their legs/knees are vulnerable, to say the very least. What's wrong with the tackler being required to wrap up the QB around the waist when they are in the pocket (not when they are scrambling) as opposed to inflicting a career ending blow below the knees. Toughness? Come on guys, are you kidding me? I don't care how tough you THINK you are but how much of an impact do you think YOUR knee will take against the joint when standing upright?

It takes rare courage to deliver the ball when you are about to be laid out and most of the NFL QB's can and do just that. I think protecting the QB not only as an athelete/individual but as a significant investment of any franchise is worthy of a little more consideration.

Just trying to inject a little rationality into the argument here...

I welcome your comments after reading this post after really considering my comments above. I am genuinely curious of your reactions after thinking it over as opposed to a "knee-Jerk" reaction. Sorry for the pun, I couldn't help myself. I know, my friends think I am corny too!

We should be able to get Suggs cheap now that pass rushers are obsolete.

Since everybody is echoing -- quite properly I might add -- the idiotic new rule to protect Tom Brady, er, I mean QBs (nobody was squawking when a Steeler took out Carson Palmer), I want to address the OT rule.

My belly-aching has nothing to do with Indy not getting an OT chance once SD scored on the first OT possession. That's the way it can go in sudden death.

The problem is the flip of the coin doing the deciding who gets the ball first. If it doesn't matter, why is it whoever wins the toss chooses "we'll receive" 99.9% of the time. (The coach who chose to go with the wind was branded Idiot of the Year.)

Have both teams kickoff to their opponents in the same direction. The team with the best field position gets to keep possession and go from there.

If both kicks are touchbacks or out of bounds, both teams must re-do the play from five yards further back.

If both teams run it back for a TD, both must try a conversion. If the score is still tied, re-do the kickoffs again.

If a turnover leads to the same team having both possessions, that team chooses which is their starting point.

Then, if a team marches 20 yards and boots a FG on its first possession, c'est la vie. At least that first possession wasn't decided bt heads or tails.