The NFL is trying to make it a rule that a player if he appears to have suffered a concussion or head injury has to leave for the rest of the game and if he does have a concussion he must sit the next game.

I'm all for protecting these guys because it is just a game.However what happens if a defensive player goes after Tom Brady or Peyton Manning just to get him out of the game.Yeah he gets a 15 yd penalty but he also just knocked Manning or Brady out of the game whether they are seriously hurt or not.So should the NFL also eject the player that causes the injury? To keep players from intentionally trying to knock players out of the game.Fines mean nothing to these guys and a 15 yd penalty is better than having to play a Manning or Brady.

I don't think that there are many players in the league that intentionally try to hurt opposing players but the league really should come up with something that prevents it from happening.

Puddle Jumper wrote: The NFL is trying to make it a rule that a player if he appears to have suffered a concussion or head injury has to leave for the rest of the game and if he does have a concussion he must sit the next game.

I'm all for protecting these guys because it is just a game.However what happens if a defensive player goes after Tom Brady or Peyton Manning just to get him out of the game.Yeah he gets a 15 yd penalty but he also just knocked Manning or Brady out of the game whether they are seriously hurt or not.So should the NFL also eject the player that causes the injury? To keep players from intentionally trying to knock players out of the game.Fines mean nothing to these guys and a 15 yd penalty is better than having to play a Manning or Brady.

I don't think that there are many players in the league that intentionally try to hurt opposing players but the league really should come up with something that prevents it from happening.

lol

I like the rule.

The NFL already gives defensive players a 15 yard penalty if they just look wrong at a quarterback. Especially if his last name is Brady.

Nothing wrong with this rule at all..ultimately..the players long term health and safety is WAYYYY more important than any football game. Concussions are nothing to take lightly..I'm glad the NFL is finally stepping up and realizing this and are trying to do something about it.

I like the rule as well but I could see a team that is fighting for a playoff spot going after an opponent's qb.Especially if they are a playoff team as well.

Dumb rule. If the player wants to play, let him.

iclfan2 wrote: Dumb rule. If the player wants to play, let him.

Yeah, because football is more important than long term health, right?

Well that's a good argument except it is their own health. Why should anyone else be telling them how to preserve it?

iclfan2 wrote: Well that's a good argument except it is their own health. Why should anyone else be telling them how to preserve it?

This is true if they were playing at home by themselves. Every workplace has measures in place required by law to ensure worker's safety. Why is the NFL any different?

iclfan2 wrote: Well that's a good argument except it is their own health. Why should anyone else be telling them how to preserve it?

Because there are plenty of college and high school players who have the misguided idea that a head injury is like any other that can be played through if you really want it badly enough.

We aren't talking about college or HS, we are talking about grown ass men getting paid millions of dollars to play a game. If they want to risk having health problems later in life or in the next game then let them. With your guys reasoning we shouldn't let anyone smoke cigarettes either.

iclfan2 wrote: We aren't talking about college or HS, we are talking about grown ass men getting paid millions of dollars to play a game. If they want to risk having health problems later in life or in the next game then let them. With your guys reasoning we shouldn't let anyone smoke cigarettes either.

No, using your reasoning we should allow guys to shoot up with various anabolic compounds on the sidelines because it's only them risking their own health.

And we don't let anyone under 18 smoke as it is.

Uhh, no, cuz anabolic steroids are cheating. People play through injuries all the time, should they make everyone sit out a game if they get helped off the field? What if they have a sprain, can the player choose to play? These are grown ass men, if they want to play with a concussion, let them.

iclfan2 wrote: Uhh, no, cuz anabolic steroids are cheating. People play through injuries all the time, should they make everyone sit out a game if they get helped off the field? What if they have a sprain, can the player choose to play? These are grown ass men, if they want to play with a concussion, let them.

A sprain isn't going to possibly kill or cause permanent neurological disorders to a player. Those grown ass men have ego's..they want to do whatever makes them look like a god..they don't care about there health at that particular moment..they are just caring about a win..looking good to the teammates..looking good to the fans..they don't want to look like a pussy. So aren't thinking about the long term effects. Get real.

Being an athletic trainer, I have dealt with this a lot and a few times this year. The long term side effects are way to risky to let someone diagnosed with a concussion go back on the field. Because if that player gets hit again, he could go down and never get back up due to second impact syndrome. And the reason athletic trainers and doctors don't let the player go back on the field is not only for the safety of the player but the liability that can come from making a poor decision. If a player has a concussion but the AT's and doctors let him back in and he suffers a career ending injury or dies, guess who gets sued? The athletic trainer, doctors, team, league, and anyone else they can get money from.

I have personally allowed kids with sprains and and other minor injuries to go back in if they are physically able and can help the team. However, concussions and possible neck injuries are the things you just don't take a chance on at all. The high school I work at had our senior QB get a concussion in the second quarter of his last game this year. I and the team doctor both agreed he had a concussion and could not go back in. He pleaded with me and begged me to go back in and it broke my heart to continue to tell him no. But his future health is much more important than a simple gameand he understood that once the game was over.

Now I'm not sure how I feel about requiring players to sit out a game because some symptoms can dissolve in less time than that but again, concussions are the one thing where is it probably much better to be safe than sorry later.

iclfan2 wrote: Uhh, no, cuz anabolic steroids are cheating. People play through injuries all the time, should they make everyone sit out a game if they get helped off the field? What if they have a sprain, can the player choose to play? These are grown ass men, if they want to play with a concussion, let them.

Spoken like someone that has never suffered a concussion.

You know what the difference is? Something like an MCL sprain or tear can be played through by bracing the affected area and the injury won't get worse. A broken finger can be played through and it won't get worse. A sprained ankle can be played through and it won't get worse.

You want to know how much worse playing with a concussion can be? Look up "brain herniation", "second impact syndrome", "subdural hematoma", and "cerbral edema". Remember Merril Hoge, who at his retirement press conference had to keep asking reporters to repeat their questions because his scrambled brain wouldn't let him remember the question long enough to formulate an answer?

Jason Smith of the Rams suffered a concussion a week ago. This past Sunday, he became sick while inactive for the game and in street clothes. Had he played with that injury, we'd be talking today about what a terrible tragedy it is for the Rams to have to bury their first-round pick who didn't live long enough to finish his first season.

the problem with the rule is that if a key player gets hit in the head and it appears he may be concussed he must sit the remainder of the game even if he is actually just clearing the Cobb webs. So if a player goes after a QB or other impact position on purpose and hits the guy in the head he must sit out the entire game if he is shaken up a bit. That is the flaw in the rule. All that is needed to take out a player is one helmet to helmet hit IMO which is not fair. I am all for them siting one game if they are in fact concussed. I would rather then sit for a 3 game period to be honest as concussions never go away in a week and it ha been proven that you do not hear for around 30 days.

NNN wrote: Jason Smith of the Rams suffered a concussion a week ago. This past Sunday, he became sick while inactive for the game and in street clothes. Had he played with that injury, we'd be talking today about what a terrible tragedy it is for the Rams to have to bury their first-round pick who didn't live long enough to finish his first season.

But who cares?!?! He's a GROWN ASS MAN! :rolleyes:

The problem I have with the rule, is that they shouldn't need to tell someone what to do. It is like the government telling me to wear a helmet or seatbelt. These men know what could happen if they still play. It is a decision they should be able to make on their own. The health consequences don't matter to me. I think it would be dumb to play the next game if you've had multiple ones, or a severe one, but who is anyone else to MAKE them sit out?

I do not think this is a good rule...it should be up to the medical staff to determine the fitness of any player, not the league.

The reason teams have doctors and athletic trainers is so they can make decisions about return to play to protect the well being of the athletes. It is not up to the athlete to make that decision whatsoever. If the doctor says you are not playing, then guess what, he's not playing unless he /she is willing to sign a waiver saying they will not hold anyone responsible for what happens to them. Most professional athletes are not dumb enough to do whatever the hell they want and ignore the orders of a team physician or athletic trainer.

iclfan2 wrote: The problem I have with the rule, is that they shouldn't need to tell someone what to do. It is like the government telling me to wear a helmet or seatbelt. These men know what could happen if they still play. It is a decision they should be able to make on their own. The health consequences don't matter to me. I think it would be dumb to play the next game if you've had multiple ones, or a severe one, but who is anyone else to MAKE them sit out?

There exists a rule in the NFL that a player can be removed from the game for being improperly padded, with the condition that he can return when he's properly padded.

We're talking about a league where no one, and I mean no one, wears a cup. Guys would go out there with nothing on but the lining of shoulder pads and a helmet if not for the minimum padding rule.

wkfan wrote: I do not think this is a good rule...it should be up to the medical staff to determine the fitness of any player, not the league.

There is a conflict of interest that exists within the NFL. In the medical community, the loyalty of a doctor lies with his patient; after all, the patient pays the bills and therefore pays the doctor's salary. If a patient really, REALLY wants to ignore recommended treatments, there's nothing that allows a doctor to force the treatment on the patient.

In the NFL, the loyalty to the team doctor and trainers lie with....who? After all, the team is the one that pays the bills and the salaries. If a guy has the perception from above that he takes it too easy on the players who he treats and doesn't get them back in the lineup possibly faster than it takes to heal the injury, then the doctor is the one looking for a new job.

And as I said before, the possibility of a fatal head injury occurring is what is driving the NFL in this case. For as backwards as a great number of practices in football may be, I give a great deal of credit to the league for being proactive in drug policies and testing, for adjusting the rules as needed to preserve the basic essence of the game, and for being consistent across the board with disciplinary measures. The NFL is being proactive here, and I applaud them.