marshawnlynch01-600x399
Seattle Seahawks running back Marshawn Lynch lowers his head during a run against the New York Jets in 2012. (AP)

By 710Sports.com staff

A lot of controversy and upheaval has surrounded the NFL's new rule barring ball carriers from using the crown of their helmets to make forcible contact with a defender in the open field, but ESPN 710 Seattle's Brock Huard says to give the rule time.

"I understand a lot of the frustration, because the essence of football is that gladiator mentality, that physicality that we love about our Seahawks, but I would just say slow down just a little bit," Huard said. "Let's see how this is called, let's see how this is played out. To me this is going to have to be a very egregious move (to be a penalty)."

The NFL owners passed the rule Wednesday (along with repealing the similarly controversial tuck rule), deeming that ball carriers who use the crown of their helmets to make forcible contact with a defender in the open field will be penalized 15 yards from the spot of the foul. And even with the uproar from fans, players and coaches alike about the rule over the last week, the owners vote wasn't even close -- 31-1, with the lone holdout being the Cincinnati Bengals.

A video that showed the differences between what would be legal and illegal for ball carriers under the rule seemed to sway the owners.

"It'll certainly make our runners aware of what we expect relative to use of the helmet," Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said. "One of the questions I ask a lot is who gains from this, offense or defense? And it's a toss-up as to which side of the ball has the advantage on this rule, if any. The main thing is it's pro-health and safety, and that's the big thing."

In the video below, Huard explains the rule further and expounds on what it could mean for the Seahawks and their top running back, Marshawn Lynch.


The Associated Press contributed to this article.

share this story:
facebook
email

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (15)


  • Add A Comment

  • RWIII wrote...
    Marshawn Lynch
    March 20, 2013 1:11 pm
    Marshawn Lynch would rather go through people than around them. I can remember two plays against San Francisco. One play at home and one play on the road where Lynch ran over a 49er defender. I really don't think Marshawn Lynch is going to like this rule change. I know I don't.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • chevysquid wrote...
    Sign of the times....
    March 20, 2013 4:06 pm
    Just another example of the continued pussification of America. It should be the players voting on the new rules, not not the owners anyways. The players are the ones with "skin in the game".
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • soo purletiv wrote...
    31-1?
    March 20, 2013 4:13 pm
    I know I am going out on a limb here. And I admit I am not a math genius. But, if all 32 owners voted, and 31 voted in favor while 1 voted against and the lone hold out was Cincinnati, am I right to conclude that Paul Allen voted in favor of this new rule? I acknowledge that I could be wrong, but in case I am correct:

    SHAME ON YOU PAUL ALLEN. IF YOU DON'T WANT FOOTBALL PLAYERS TO PLAY FOOTBALL, GO BUY AN NBA TEAM (YA, I KNOW, YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE OF THEM TOO, BUT I THINK YOU GET MY POINT). EVERY TIME YOU MAKE THESE ASININE RULES YOU TAKE THE CRUMBS THAT US LITTLE PLEBS HAVE GROWN TO LOVE! YOU OBVIOUSLY IGNORED THE VOICES OF THE FANS. YOU KNOW, THE ONES WHO PAY FOR YOUR FOOTBALL TEAM. SHAME ON YOU FOR NOT TAKING US INTO CONSIDERATION, YOU SELF RIGHTEOUS LOSER!!!

    Given the chance my calculations are wrong, I take back my soap box yelling rant! And if I sound a bit angry, it's because, well, I am!

    BTW: where is the camera and mic-in-the-face of Paul Allen in regards to this vote (assuming again my calculations are accurate)? I would love to see him answer to the fans in a non rehearsed unscheduled off-guard "interview". He needs to feel the angst of the fans on this one.

    Oh, also. Jerry: In answer to your preposterous question above, as to "who gains from this, offense or defense? And it's a toss-up as to which side of the ball has the advantage on this rule, if any...."

    Hey, Bozo any self respecting football fan knows the answer, retard. Are you really that stupid, or do you assume we are?

    Ya, that's what I thought...

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Hawkman wrote...
    this is all a bunch of Crap...
    March 20, 2013 4:14 pm
    the only reason the owners would agree to this is the sue happy players who choose to play football to sue for brain injuries after the fact. The Players all know what they were getting into when they decided to play ball. The big money and the extras. If they were concerned out their injuries they would not play ball. Injuries are part of the game. Knees go out , legs are broken, necks are broken, brains are injured. It is a contact sport. I agree to try to make it as safe as possible, but to what degree. The game is already losing some of its edge and now you are going to tell a running back to not hit with his head. How is that possible.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • clevesside wrote...
    Did he or didn't he......
    March 20, 2013 6:45 pm
    ...this rule will be hard to enforce, like many other new rules. I'd add another half-hour to game time just for this. In December in a place like Green Bay or Buffalo, that's a lotta of t-t-time for football.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Teahawk wrote...
    Before you sharpen the pitchforks...
    March 20, 2013 7:26 pm
    Every incidence of helmet down contact has the potential to end in catastrophic injury. When you lead with the crown of your helmet, it's crappy technique whether blocking, tackling, or running with the ball. You are taught as a high school football player never to lead with the crown of your helmet and to see what you hit. The spearing rule has been in effect since the late 70s and statistically has reduced the number of catastrophic head and cervical spine injuries in all levels of football. What kind of message does is sent to your youth or high school football player watches a game on Sunday and they see James Harrison continuously tackle with the crown of his helmet instead of using proper fundamentals? This is the next natural progression of the spearing rule that will hopefully further reduce the potential for life changing injuries. A ball carrier who initiates contact with the crown of his helmet is actually at great risk of cervical spine injury. This is a link to a video put out by the National Athletic Trainer's Association that details this exact type of play (along with others) that most frequently cause these types of injuries: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkBAiK7WEFA Some people are going to call this pussification, but there's nothing wrong with changing the rules in an intelligent, researched manner IMO. I don't know about the other owners, but I have faith that Paul Allen has the integrity of the game in mind and is a pretty smart guy. I think this is one of those things that's simply the right thing to do to protect your players. He hardly needs to make more money as an owner.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • tlmbrt wrote...
    TEAHAWK
    March 21, 2013 12:51 am
    You are a moron. Go back to your knitting, you PUZZY!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Teahawk wrote...
    tlmbrt
    March 21, 2013 9:59 pm
    Well thought out response.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • tlmbrt wrote...
    We have already seen
    March 21, 2013 12:49 am
    how the referees always err on the "side of caution" and tend to call these new head contact penalties just because they "look bad". Even if no intent was present or it's just "close". Instant replay shows they are often wrong, but the damage is already done. This will be no different and it will screw up the games. Football is inherently violent and players get injured. It is impossible to make it totally "safe", unless they turn it into a completely different game.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Country_Dog wrote...
    I gave it some time...
    March 21, 2013 5:30 am
    four hours. And I still don't like it.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • kato1967 wrote...
    Farce
    March 21, 2013 7:17 am
    This rule is lame, lame, lame. I have to wonder if Marshawn's Lynch epic TD run against the Saints would have been called back due to this rule.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RWIII wrote...
    Protecting the runner
    March 21, 2013 8:32 am
    Jerome Bettis made the commet that sometimes he leads with the crown of the helmet to protect himself. There are going to be situations where the runner needs to lead with the crown of the helmet to protect himself. So what he is suppose to do in that split second? You tell me.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • RWIII wrote...
    Flag football
    March 21, 2013 8:34 am
    Folks: Why don't we just give everyone a set of flags and play flag football.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • The Homie wrote...
    Crown of the helmet rule
    March 21, 2013 11:08 am
    I'd never thought about brain damage as a sign of weakness or being less than "manly". I always thought damage was just bad. As a person that grew up with my brain damaged father I know something about these things. His had nothing to do with football: he was in a car accident before the days of shoulder seat belts. (that would have prevented most or all of the damage he received) The laws of physics don't care HOW you hit your head. Let's lighten up and see how this plays out. I'm pretty sure the rules are always subject to change.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }








Seattle Mariners

Does Jesus Montero have a future at first base?

Bob Stelton and Dave Grosby share their thoughts on the Mariners' plan to have Jesus Montero play first base now that his days as a primary catcher appear to be over.


Seattle Seahawks

Ex-Seahawk Mike Williams resurfaces in CFL

Former Seahawks wide receiver Mike Williams has landed with the Toronto Argonauts of the Canadian Football League.


Sounders FC

Seattle Sounders facing long, odd road trip

Two games in six days going back-and-forth to Southern California was going to be enough of a travel challenge for the Seattle Sounders. Then U.S. Soccer decided to throw a major detour into the Sounders travel plans.
Seahawks tickets

Blogs

Brock and Salk Where Russell Wilson has shown the most growth
6 hours, 5 minutes ago.
WSU Cougars Coaches best-paid state employees in Washington
Wednesday, May 22, 9:47 am




Contact Us
Employment
Contest Rules
RSS
Terms of Use
Privacy Statement
EEO Public File Report
Copyright Infringement
mynorthwest.com
Copyright © 2013 Bonneville International. All rights reserved.