Emmitt Smith Says Proposed Safety Rule Change Means NFL Has Lost Its Mind

Hall of Fame running back Emmitt Smith didn't mince any words when asked about a potential NFL rule change on Thursday.

If the league's competition committee approves a rule outlawing contact that is initiated by the crown of the helmet, Smith says that will be proof that the league "has lost" its "mind.

Twenty four of 32 votes are needed to pass the safety-minded rule, which would apply to players on both sides of the ball when contact is made outside the tackle box. The vote will be made at next week's owners meetings in Phoenix.

Smith, the league's all-time rushing leader who fought for every one of his 18,355 yards, will apparently be watching with much interest.

From 105.3 The Fan: “If I’m a running back and I’m running into a linebacker, you’re telling me I have to keep my head up so he can take my chin off?’’ Smith said Thursday in an exclusive interview with Dallas radio station 105.3 The Fan. “You’ve absolutely lost your mind.’’

“As a running back, it’s almost impossible (to not lower your head),’’ said the Dallas Cowboys legend. “The first thing you do is get behind your shoulder pads. That means you’re leaning forward and the first part of contact that’s going to take place is your head, regardless."

Source: Yahoo! Sports

 

I hate to say it, but I gotta agree with Emmitt...

 

Me too.

 

i side with the league. i'm sick and tired of seeing running backs, wide receivers, and defenders initiate contact with the crown of their helmet, knowing that in 20 years when they are bankrupt, they are going to come back and sue the league.

and there is absolutely no reason they have to lead with the crown of the helmet. if you have the ball and want to try and get a few extra yards, use a stiff arm, spin, or footwork. i rarely see ball carriers use true ball carrying skills anymore like I used to with Walter Payton and Barry Sanders.

If you're a defender, the only reason you lead with the crown of your helmet is to inflict pain and create fear. There is nothing fundamentally sound on either side of the ball that would require a player to initiate contact with the crown of their helmet so I have no problem getting rid of it completely.

 

Sounds like the rule has passed...

 

31-1 in votes, wow.

 

This really will change the game for the worse...

 

Did this rule just get voted on? I was on NFL.com, and they said the rule hadn't been voted on yet.

 

Yes it just got voted on.

 

Haven't heard who voted against it...

 

Well you'll see a lot running backs sliding or running out of bounds now. But then again, don't see too many spin moves anymore, so maybe that will come back more prevelantly

 

Bengals voted against it.

 

This is freaking stupid, Emmitt is right, whatever happened to lower the shoulder and running over a guy, I guess thats illegal now, unneccesary roughness...it's freaking football.

 

They can still do that. Just not with the crown of the helmet. They can do it with a shoulder or even their face...

 

Folks,we are seeing the nfl die right before our eyes!!!

 

exactly. i'm not joining the 'sky is falling' mentality that everyone else has right now. nowhere, at any time, ever, was i ever taught nor did I teach my boys to drive the crown of their helmet into the defender when carrying the ball. there is absolutely no fundamental logic to that. yes, i taught them that one technique to avoid a tackle is to stay low and use their shoulder to drive through the tackle. the only reason you see pros using the crown of their helmet on either side of the ball is to deliver punishment and intimidate the defenders. It's just a major injury waiting to happen.

i know i'm in the minority, but the fact that these ball carriers now have to play by the same rules (even though they are not always followed) as the defenders actually increases my enjoyment of the game because I was sick of seeing it.

 

They only found 5 helmet-to-helmet collisions would've been in violation of this rule from last year :icon_eek:

 

They found 5 in Week 10 and 6 in Week 16. The competition committee only looked at two full weeks of games. So on average, it was 5.5 per game.

 

I tend to agree with you Captain. I'd like to see how the officials are calling it before I join that mentality that it's going to end the run game for good.

 

I was trying to find the article I read earlier. Whoever wrote it screwed the details, because he stated that they looked at every play from every game and found 34 collisions and only 5 of those would've been infractions based on the new rule. But then I found the actual complete committee notes, and they did say 5 in one week and 6 in the other, which they thought was too many