Hey, who let that guy in the room?

If I can offer a brief word of advice to those brave souls in charge of college football, letting Rogers Redding have input into player safety issues is probably as good a way as I know of to make sure everyone is unhappy with whatever rules changes are made.

“I don’t know if there’s a lot more we can do with the rules without fundamentally changing the game, and it may be necessary to do that,” said Redding, the national coordinator of officiating and secretary-rules editor of the NCAA football rules committee. “I’m not suggesting this at all. But it may be at the point where we take a look at taking away any contact above the neck at all.”

Yeah, I can’t wait to see how they enforce that consistently.

As a general rule of thumb, any time Redding starts off by saying “I don’t know”, it’s best to heed that.



Filed under College Football, The Body Is A Temple

14 responses to “Hey, who let that guy in the room?

  1. TennesseeDawg

    Maybe the NCAA should just revive laser tag for football so no contact has to be made.


  2. mwo

    Joe Paterno had the best idea I have heard to remedy this situation. He said to remove the facemasks from the helmets. That would make me think twice before leading with my head.


  3. Go Dawgs!

    I want the game to be safer. I care a lot about our guys and the players in general. I don’t know… I love this game. I am OK with making changes to the game to make it a safer game, but when you’ve got a bullshit flag like the one at the end of the Ravens-Colts game for “targeting a defenseless receiver”, then that’s not football anymore. But, when you see a young man like the Rutgers player paralyzed, I don’t know… I don’t know how I’d feel if that happened to one of our guys and I was bitching about people trying to make the game safer. I’m obviously conflicted on this issue. I guess the one thing that I’m clear on is that I want someone smarter than Rogers Redding making this call if we’re going to radically change the game.


  4. Macallanlover

    It is unfair to label those who feel the game has gone too far with these penalities as “unconcerned about player safety”. We all would love to eliminate injuries from the game but we are approaching a point where the players, officials, fans, broadcasters/analysts, and administrators can no longer tell what is legal, and what is not. Every strong hit I see in a game now brings about a discussion, several replays, and fans on both sides wondering whether that was good or not. It is getting more difficult to enjoy the game. And it isn’t over when the game is over either, we have to wait for the SEC, or NFL office to review game film to see if the player can even play the next game.


    • Mayor of Dawgtown

      I am compelled to agree with my colleague Mac on this. The rules are now so fuzzy nobody, including the refs, knows what is permissible and what is impermissible. This also leads to a wide variation in enforcement from conference to conference and even from crew to crew. How in the hell are the players supposed to know?


    • W Cobb Dawg

      Mac sums it all up as well as anyone could.


  5. Cojones

    If the rule extends to the HS training grounds, I have no problem. That’s when their weight becomes involved with their earlier Pop Warner training and becomes a critical time to teach tackling that doesn’t endanger life or cripple other players unnecessarily beyond where the game stands.


  6. fatman48

    If you start off by saying ‘I don’t know”, then maybe you need to sit down and shut-up, if high schools, college and the NFL are looking to get better control of targeting, head-to-head, spearing, late hits on unprotected players, maybe ejection from the game will get the players attention, eject the coaches, there are ways to stop this kind of play. Ask the guys in wheel chairs or confined to beds… Its all in how the coaches teach the game starting in pee-wee ball, tackle the legs not the head. ” I’m just sayin” GATA “GO DAWGS”


  7. Macallanlover

    Pretty much it is going to be a penalty if you can hear any sound of contact over the air, or if it brings a reaction from the fans. Also, penalties are likely if you make contact within 2-3 yards of the boundary and your momentum carries you beyond the out of bounds line (even though not making contact could result in giving up a first down, or another 5+ yards.)

    Was I the only person who had never seen a one point safety before the TAMU/OU game this past week? Impressed that the officiating crew knew the rule immediately but had never seen it before. Nessler had actually seen it before in a game he had broadcast. Good rule I think, just surprised someone had foreseen the need for it.


    • Cojones

      I thought It also could be called against you, as if you are in a turnover play, go into the end zone and attempt to run the play back out to the field instead of downing the ball in the end zone initially.


      • sUGArdaddy

        No, it’s 2 points then. However, there was some tricky-ness in that play, too. I believe since the ball was recovered in the field of play, pitched backwards (which was essentially a fumble) that if the Oregon guy that made the tackle on the play had recovered the ball it would have been a 1-point conversion and not a 2-point conversion since they were originally going for a 1 point kick. I’m pretty sure that’s right.

        Don’t see those plays much.

        As for player safety, it’s counter-intuitive. The more technilogically advanced we make equipment, the safer players feel using themselves as weapons. The better we get at strength, conditioning and nutrition, the more violent the collisions. I’m not quite sure anyone knows how to fix it. One thing I’d like to see is a coach be able to challenge a 15-yd penalty when we believes a player led with his shoulder instead of his head but it was too fast for the ref to see.