No more low block in 2013? Maybe

[Trogdor]

Originally Posted by MetSox17

Wait, what? Since when has this been the rule? Pretty sure you can't chop block an engaged defender regardless of where he is lined up.

Originally Posted by CJSchneider

I'm with you on this. If you are engaged it doesn't matter with whom you are engaged or where you are lined up.

The rule is actually "more than one position away". It's a terrible rule to begin with. Outlaw it completely or keep it completely.

As MDS pointed out earlier in the afternoon, the Steelers are complaining about the Ravens’ use of illegal chop blocks.

But the Steelers, and folks like ESPN’s Merril Hoge, apparently don’t understand the chop block rule.

An illegal chop block doesn't occur when, for example, the center engages the nose tackle and one or both of the guards block him low. Instead, an illegal chop block happens only when the offensive lineman delivering the low block was originally lined up more than one position away from the offensive lineman who initially has engaged the defender.

Here’s the official rule, which a league source has forwarded to PFT: “On a running play, A1, an offensive lineman, chops a defensive player after the defensive player has been engaged by A2 (high or low), and the initial alignment of A2 is more than one position away from A1. The rule applies only when the block occurs at a time when the flow of the play is clearly away from A1.”

And so, if the center hits a guy high and a tackle hits him low, it’s a penalty. When it’s a center and one of the two guards, the chop block is not illegal.

An argument could be made that the rules should be changed, for the same reason that some think the rule regarding low blocks against defensive backs in the open field should be adjusted. For now, however, the term “illegal chop block” has a definition far more narrow than the Steelers will either realize or admit.

IMHO they should just change it to "cannot low block an engaged defender". Less confusion and thoughts for referees which is honestly a good thing after watching some of the recent games. -_-

[CJSchneider]

Now you are talking "terms". When it is a combination of two O-lineman who are next to each other it is called an "illegal low block" not a "chop block". It will, as it should, receive a flag and a 10 yard penalty (I believe).

[CJSchneider]

Originally Posted by Trogdor

IMHO they should just change it to "cannot low block an engaged defender". Less confusion and thoughts for referees which is honestly a good thing after watching some of the recent games. -_-

In either case, I concur with your summation.

[MetSox17]

I'm gonna go ahead and wait to see an official transcript of the rules that says this, not from "a league source", cause that sounds ********.

[CJSchneider]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...op-block-rule/


Here is the source of the article.

[CJSchneider]

There are three different rules for basically the same thing: chop block, illegal low block, and illegal block above the waist (at least in HS and MS). The reason being they assume a person who is a position away has the time and space to build up a "head of steam" and potentially cause more harm.

[vidae]

Eric Berry says yay.

[Raiderz4Life]

[Rob S]

I used to love cut blocking. I would be sad if this goes through. Nothing better than giving a DL that has been firing off the ball all game a surprise and send him flying.

[bigbluedefense]

If this does go down, it dramatically tilts the landscape in the favor of defenses again.

And it changes pass protection. No longer can a 200 lb RB sit back and cut a blitzing linebacker in pass pro. Which will lead to more blitzes and more hits on the qb.

Which will indirectly lead to an influx of bigger RBs making their way to the field in obvious passing downs as well to counter this.

No zone blocking probably leads to more passes in an already pass happy league as well.

[TACKLE]

Originally Posted by ATLDirtyBirds

Good night sweet outside zone.

this.......

[villagewarrior]

I grow weary of the absolute pussification of football being perpetrated by the NFL. Eric Winston was wrong, pro football players ARE gladiators. They sacrifice their bodies for the amusement of the masses in exchange for hideously large sums of money and fame. No football player steps on the gridiron without understanding the risk. If anyone legitimately cares about the health of the players they need to ban football in it's entirety. Otherwise, the game is inherently violent and dangerous to the health of the human beings involved in it, and everybody needs to understand that one important fact before moving on.

[bucfan12]

Might as well just eliminate the run game all together. No more pulling guards. Heck even in te pass game rbs cut block blitzes.