PDA

View Full Version : The Clowney hit



Olympic Fan
07-23-2013, 05:15 PM
Interesting news from the ACC meetings Monday. During a session to talk about new rules, ACC supervisor of officials Doug Rhoads revealed that the famous Jadevon Clowney hit against Michigan in the Outback Bowl would not only be illegal under the new rules forbidding helmet to helmet contact, but also would have resulted in a Vlowney's ejection from the game:

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2013-07-22/jadeveon-clowney-hit-video-michigan-vincent-smith-gif-ejected-acc-mike-Pereira

I'm hearing a lot of outraged reactions from football writers I know. As a Duke fan, I can think of two blatant helmet to helmet hits that Sean Renfree took last year that forced him out of games that were not illegal under the rules then in place. So I guess I like the new rule, although it's too late to help Renfree or Duke (one of the hits came at a key moment in the VPI game, when it was still up for grabs ... the other was against FSU and we weren't going to win that one anyway).

Newton_14
07-23-2013, 05:54 PM
Interesting news from the ACC meetings Monday. During a session to talk about new rules, ACC supervisor of officials Doug Rhoads revealed that the famous Jadevon Clowney hit against Michigan in the Outback Bowl would not only be illegal under the new rules forbidding helmet to helmet contact, but also would have resulted in a Vlowney's ejection from the game:

http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2013-07-22/jadeveon-clowney-hit-video-michigan-vincent-smith-gif-ejected-acc-mike-Pereira

I'm hearing a lot of outraged reactions from football writers I know. As a Duke fan, I can think of two blatant helmet to helmet hits that Sean Renfree took last year that forced him out of games that were not illegal under the rules then in place. So I guess I like the new rule, although it's too late to help Renfree or Duke (one of the hits came at a key moment in the VPI game, when it was still up for grabs ... the other was against FSU and we weren't going to win that one anyway).


That's ridiculous. Best legal FB play, let alone hit, of the year. Clowney's head was up prior to the contact. A textbook hit. Which is why the only thing hurt on the running back was his feelings.

OldPhiKap
07-23-2013, 06:03 PM
That's ridiculous. Best legal FB play, let alone hit, of the year. Clowney's head was up prior to the contact. A textbook hit. Which is why the only thing hurt on the running back was his feelings.

Beat me to it. Clowney filled the gap and got the guy square. Sometimes the angles collide at 180.

I agree with getting rid of helmet to helmet, or at least penalizing the junk out of it. But that was clean IMHO.

Atlanta Duke
07-23-2013, 06:09 PM
Concussions are a potentially mortal threat to football at all levels. In attempting to minimize to the point of elimination circumstances in which blows to the head may occur, the question is at what point the revised game is played in a manner that is no longer what has made football so popular.

The hypothetical treatment of Clowney's tackle under the new rules is one example of the dilemma faced by those who run the game.

Bob Green
07-23-2013, 06:38 PM
Concussions are a potentially mortal threat to football at all levels.

Leather helmets should be re-instituted. I'm serious. The helmet is Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), which has evolved into a weapon. The problem with outlawing helmet-to-helmet contact is it places an awful burden upon the referees in a fast moving game.

I enjoyed the Spring Game, but there were no kick-offs and all punts were fair caught. Why? Because the risk of injury is too great on those plays. The kick-off and punt returns as we know them are destined to become victims of rules changes designed to save the game. I'd rather see the helmet go away.

Jim3k
07-23-2013, 08:00 PM
Is there a slo-mo of that? At regular speed I think, but can't be sure, that Clowney's helmet hit the runner's helmet. If so, doesn't that mean a penalty even under last year's rules? He certainly knocked the ball carrier's helmet off. It takes a truly jarring blow to smack the chin strap off. And that would be helmet to helmet by definition, right?

Turtleboy
07-23-2013, 08:15 PM
Is there a slo-mo of that? At regular speed I think, but can't be sure, that Clowney's helmet hit the runner's helmet. If so, doesn't that mean a penalty even under last year's rules? He certainly knocked the ball carrier's helmet off. It takes a truly jarring blow to smack the chin strap off. And that would be helmet to helmet by definition, right?I've watched in slo mo, courtesy of my satellite TV. He does lower his helmet, but the point of contact with it is dead center, right between the shoulders. The main impact is with Clowney's torso. The QB's helmet flew off because he basically ran into a brick wall moving towards's him at 25 mph.

If you google "Clowney hit slow motion" you will see several versions.

OldPhiKap
07-23-2013, 08:29 PM
I've watched in slo mo, courtesy of my satellite TV. He does lower his helmet, but the point of contact with it is dead center, right between the shoulders. The main impact is with Clowney's torso. The QB's helmet flew off because he basically ran into a brick wall moving towards's him at 25 mph.

If you google "Clowney hit slow motion" you will see several versions.

It seems to me that there is a big difference between leading with the helmet, and h-2-h contact. The former is wrong, the latter is part of a violent game.

Olympic Fan
07-23-2013, 08:44 PM
It seems to me that there is a big difference between leading with the helmet, and h-2-h contact. The former is wrong, the latter is part of a violent game.

The whole point of the new rule ... helmet to helmet IS now illegal.

Newton_14
07-23-2013, 08:58 PM
I've watched in slo mo, courtesy of my satellite TV. He does lower his helmet, but the point of contact with it is dead center, right between the shoulders. The main impact is with Clowney's torso. The QB's helmet flew off because he basically ran into a brick wall moving towards's him at 25 mph.

If you google "Clowney hit slow motion" you will see several versions.


It appears to me that Clowney's facemask, not the crown of the helmet hits the RB in the chest, but agree it's hard to tell exactly even in slo-mo.

As for the helmet flying off, there is a reason the new rule was put in that players have to sit a play if their helmet comes off. A lot of these guys do not wear the helmet tightly enough and thus they come off a lot even on plays where the hit was not that bad. Not sure if it's a comfort thing or not, but does not make much sense to me. I would want mine as tight as possible.

OldPhiKap
07-23-2013, 09:03 PM
The whole point of the new rule ... helmet to helmet IS now illegal.

Agreed, but it is like saying that you cannot take charges because injuries happen.

Clowney's hit is what defense lineman or blitzing back is supposed to do. How do you tell a guy to shoot the gap, stop the running back, but make sure your helmets do not touch? That is as square a tackle as you could want.

There are times when you see defensive backs lead with the helmet into a receiver coming across the middle. Reprehensible. But a bang bang play in the backfield or at the line on a run -- what is a defenseman supposed to do?

Rhetorical questions are obviously not directed at you, Oly.

moonpie23
07-23-2013, 10:21 PM
the "clowney hit" may turn into something else now that usc is checking into his association with JZ..

Jarhead
07-23-2013, 11:08 PM
Leather helmets should be re-instituted. I'm serious. The helmet is Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), which has evolved into a weapon. The problem with outlawing helmet-to-helmet contact is it places an awful burden upon the referees in a fast moving game.

I enjoyed the Spring Game, but there were no kick-offs and all punts were fair caught. Why? Because the risk of injury is too great on those plays. The kick-off and punt returns as we know them are destined to become victims of rules changes designed to save the game. I'd rather see the helmet go away.

I'm with you, Bob. I'd even go a little further and severely reduce the size and weight of the shoulder pads. Maybe a little more -- just cover the ears with helmet. That would prevent the cauliflower ears in the scrum. I haven't checked lately, but rugby, as played in the UK, just doesn't seem to have the same problems as football. A rugby match can be just as exciting as football, but without the brain damage.

By the way, that hit was face to face, and a loose chin strap. No need for a flag.

Steven43
07-24-2013, 12:06 AM
That's ridiculous. Best legal FB play, let alone hit, of the year. Clowney's head was up prior to the contact. A textbook hit. Which is why the only thing hurt on the running back was his feelings.

I disagree that Clowney's head was up prior to contact. I have watched this play over and over in slow motion and in my opinion Clowney lowered his head before impact and drove the crown of his helmet straight into the chest of the Michigan running back. Watch a video that shows a side view of the play. Clearly, the top of his helmet is the first thing that makes contact. He absolutely used his helmet as a weapon.

BigWayne
07-24-2013, 12:23 AM
It appears to me that Clowney's facemask, not the crown of the helmet hits the RB in the chest, but agree it's hard to tell exactly even in slo-mo.

As for the helmet flying off, there is a reason the new rule was put in that players have to sit a play if their helmet comes off. A lot of these guys do not wear the helmet tightly enough and thus they come off a lot even on plays where the hit was not that bad. Not sure if it's a comfort thing or not, but does not make much sense to me. I would want mine as tight as possible.

The helmets coming off is mostly a way to get your unhelmeted face on TV. Since it is a penalty to take your own helmet off on the field of play, some
players feel the need to get others to do it for them

g-money
07-24-2013, 01:28 AM
I'm with you, Bob. I'd even go a little further and severely reduce the size and weight of the shoulder pads. Maybe a little more -- just cover the ears with helmet. That would prevent the cauliflower ears in the scrum. I haven't checked lately, but rugby, as played in the UK, just doesn't seem to have the same problems as football. A rugby match can be just as exciting as football, but without the brain damage.

Yep, I would argue that the padding in football does exactly the opposite of its intended purpose. Instead of protecting players from injury, it gives them a feeling of invincibility and causes them to be ultra-aggressive (the "human missile", as it were), leading to injuries that would not otherwise occur.

If the NFL tried a season with no pads, I think serious injuries (particularly concussions) would drop by at least a factor of 2. Of course I have no data whatsoever to back this up, but that is what makes a message board fun.

Mike Corey
07-24-2013, 07:00 AM
http://thebiglead.fantasysportsven.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/clowney1-1-1-13.gif

http://thebiglead.fantasysportsven.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/clowney2-1-1-13.gif

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/article/media_slots/photos/000/668/102/ClowneyHit2_original.gif?1357079498

Dev11
07-24-2013, 08:29 AM
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/article/media_slots/photos/000/668/102/ClowneyHit2_original.gif?1357079498

The third image makes it look pretty clean. Clowney hits him hard, but that helmet is loose. Somewhere off-camera, a Michigan equipment manager is being yelled at for that.

MCFinARL
07-24-2013, 09:42 AM
Michael Wilbon was discussing this on PTI yesterday. His theory--rules changes restricting defensive hits will be to the advantage of teams like Vanderbilt and Duke (his examples) who have been able to put together good offenses but can't recruit the very best defensive players (he didn't say why they can't but the implication was academic standards might have something to do with it).

Zeke
07-24-2013, 09:55 AM
Would someone please answer a question I have regarding a helmet to helmet hit. Suppose a tackler is about to make a hit - head down and aimed at the waist of the runner. The runner lowers his head so that a helmet to helmet contact is made. Does the runner EVER get penalized. I don't think I have ever seen this called.

blazindw
07-24-2013, 10:02 AM
Would someone please answer a question I have regarding a helmet to helmet hit. Suppose a tackler is about to make a hit - head down and aimed at the waist of the runner. The runner lowers his head so that a helmet to helmet contact is made. Does the runner EVER get penalized. I don't think I have ever seen this called.

This will be a penalty on the runner in the NFL beginning this season.

FerryFor50
07-24-2013, 10:06 AM
I disagree that Clowney's head was up prior to contact. I have watched this play over and over in slow motion and in my opinion Clowney lowered his head before impact and drove the crown of his helmet straight into the chest of the Michigan running back. Watch a video that shows a side view of the play. Clearly, the top of his helmet is the first thing that makes contact. He absolutely used his helmet as a weapon.

On what planet is the crown of the helmet defined as the facemask?

Because in this image, Clowney is definitely hitting with the facemask and no helmet contact is made. The facemask is in the chest at contact:

3500

And the other issue is that the player being hit is a ball carrier, not the QB and not a defenseless receiver. The rules have generally favored those offensive players over ball carriers like RBs or WRs running after a catch.

cmccoy11
07-24-2013, 10:47 AM
On what planet is the crown of the helmet defined as the facemask?

Because in this image, Clowney is definitely hitting with the facemask and no helmet contact is made. The facemask is in the chest at contact:

3500

And the other issue is that the player being hit is a ball carrier, not the QB and not a defenseless receiver. The rules have generally favored those offensive players over ball carriers like RBs or WRs running after a catch.


That picture is a bit late. After the initial contact was made, Clowney raised his hemet. If you watch it in slow mo, it's pretty clear to me.

OldPhiKap
07-24-2013, 11:03 AM
When a defensive player shoots the gap, he has to tackle squarely. If he is running forward, his helmet is out front. Not sure what he is supposed to do -- stand erect, and let the guy run over him? Aim for the legs, maybe breaking the guy's kneecap (or geting juked and missing)?

If we need slo mo to figure it out, it's not a workable rule. I think the slo mo analysis by various posters makes cases for either side.

Jderf
07-24-2013, 11:29 AM
Yep, I would argue that the padding in football does exactly the opposite of its intended purpose. Instead of protecting players from injury, it gives them a feeling of invincibility and causes them to be ultra-aggressive (the "human missile", as it were), leading to injuries that would not otherwise occur.

If the NFL tried a season with no pads, I think serious injuries (particularly concussions) would drop by at least a factor of 2. Of course I have no data whatsoever to back this up, but that is what makes a message board fun.

I don't know if I'd ever suggest a season without padding, but I have found myself wondering about the effectiveness of NFL helmets before. I used to do some pretty intense speed skating, and I can tell you that our helmets were made such that they would intentionally crack/cave in a little upon impact. That way, much of the force from a crash is absorbed by the crumpled shell (and not your head). But in the NFL, it seems like the helmet casings have absolutely zero give to them. The helmet casing is just a hard shell, which I believe transfers all the force from an impact straight to the skull/neck.

Maybe someone with more knowledge on the topic can correct me, but I can't help but think that concussions and neck injuries could be reduced by using helmets with casings that weren't hard as concrete. As it is now, it almost seems like the helmets used in the NFL have been "weaponized" to produce more eye-popping impacts.

Mike Corey
07-24-2013, 11:35 AM
Given that the running back wasn't injured, can we all at least agree that watching a M*chigan player get tackled so well is a beautiful thing?

FerryFor50
07-24-2013, 11:40 AM
That picture is a bit late. After the initial contact was made, Clowney raised his hemet. If you watch it in slow mo, it's pretty clear to me.

Doesn't matter how he came in. What matters is where his head was on contact. He's still hitting with the helmet face up, not in a spear position.

cmccoy11
07-24-2013, 12:08 PM
Doesn't matter how he came in. What matters is where his head was on contact. He's still hitting with the helmet face up, not in a spear position.

The one picture I shared shows him coming in with his head down but the other clearly shows him making initial contact with his head down, IMO.

Regardless, tough to judge even in slow-mo let alone in real time and I don't think he had the intention of spearing the RB anyway. Sometimes I think football players, especially NFL, just want to kill each other.

94duke
07-25-2013, 08:43 AM
kids are are taught early to hit like that...
http://extramustard.si.com/2013/07/24/pee-wee-defender-does-best-jadeveon-clowney-impression-lays-out-fellow-youth/

94duke
07-25-2013, 10:11 AM
kids are are taught early to hit like that...
http://extramustard.si.com/2013/07/24/pee-wee-defender-does-best-jadeveon-clowney-impression-lays-out-fellow-youth/

I'm not condoning it, but I think it is telling that one of the coaches falls down laughing after the hit.
These hits are entertaining to some people. People applaud and encourage the behavior.
If these types of hits are to be reigned in, the kids need to be taught the proper way to hit as well.