Colt McCoy Rule
-
sportchamppsNew Rule NFL will have a independent doctor who can call down and have a player checked on any play. What do you think good move or bad move for the nfl.
-
Con_Almaoverreaction rule.
Yeah, no one saw the hit. Sure. -
Sykotyk
Your second line pretty much negates the first line.Con_Alma;1022690 wrote:overreaction rule.
Yeah, no one saw the hit. Sure.
The fact that everyone on the sideline (i.e., those with the capability of stepping in) did nothing, demands someone independent of the team to make the call to have a player tested if a concussion is speculated. -
hoops23
Con_Alma'd/Sykotyk;1022696 wrote:Your second line pretty much negates the first line.
The fact that everyone on the sideline (i.e., those with the capability of stepping in) did nothing, demands someone independent of the team to make the call to have a player tested if a concussion is speculated. -
HitsRusI don't see a downside with this.
-
Fly4Fun
Exactly. And the Brown's excuse is comical at best. No one saw the QB take the hit that might lead to a concussion. BS. The QB is the focal point of the team. It'd be more believable if it was a lineman or something.HitsRus;1022738 wrote:I don't see a downside with this.
This is a good rule. -
WebFireBig Brother.
-
Commander of Awesome
Except that everyone, including commentators on BSPN that have played in the NFL dispute what you say and I've heard them say how they could easily see someone on the training staff not seeing the hit. Nice fail.QQ4Fail;1022769 wrote:Exactly. And the Brown's excuse is comical at best. No one saw the QB take the hit that might lead to a concussion. BS. The QB is the focal point of the team. It'd be more believable if it was a lineman or something. -
THE4RINGZI like the rule. Player safety is important. But one guy to watch all eleven players on the field during each play seems a little bit overwhelming.
-
DeyDurkie5If no one on the medical staff sees it, and mccoy says he is good to go and shows no symptoms of concussions, then I don't see how you CAN'T put him back in.
-
Skyhook79
I have to disagree too, I think it is very plausible that no one from the Browns sideline saw the play because lets face it this team is very unwatchable.Fly4Fun;1022769 wrote:Exactly. And the Brown's excuse is comical at best. No one saw the QB take the hit that might lead to a concussion. BS. The QB is the focal point of the team. It'd be more believable if it was a lineman or something.
This is a good rule. -
thavoiceAnother rule because of the browns idiocy. The other is at games when the vendors have to take the caps off your drinks because of the time their fans pelted the officials with full bottles of beer/pop/water.
-
Con_Alma
It doesn't negate the first.Sykotyk;1022696 wrote:Your second line pretty much negates the first line.
The fact that everyone on the sideline (i.e., those with the capability of stepping in) did nothing, demands someone independent of the team to make the call to have a player tested if a concussion is speculated.
It doesn't take a doctor to know that he needed to at a minimum have time to shake of the hit and be further evaluated. They knew it and were hopeful it wouldn't matter ...and sent him back in.
It's an overreaction.
A doctor doesn't need to watch the game and decide who can play. A doctor is needed to evaluate injuries. It's an overreaction. -
DeyDurkie5
is it an overreaction?Con_Alma;1022838 wrote:It doesn't negate the first.
It doesn't take a doctor to know that he needed to at a minimum have time to shake of the hit and be further evaluated. They knew it and were hopeful it wouldn't matter ...and sent him back in.
It's an overreaction.
A doctor doesn't need to watch the game and decide who can play. A doctor is needed to evaluate injuries. It's an overreaction. -
Con_AlmaAn overreaction it is.
The NFL wants and needs a track record of effort protecting the players as much as reasonably possible from concussions so that when the players are old and screwed up the players union doesn't have any more ammo than they currently have supporting a negligence suit.
It an overreaction.
-
killer_ewokDefinitely a good rule. Something positive came out of Harrison's illegal hit and Cleveland's incompetence/negligence. Speaking of which....What is with the Browns' medical staff? If players aren't repeatedly getting staph infections....it's them not testing a player for a concussion. WTF?
My goodness, you've got one of the finest medical facilities in the country right there in the city and your pro football franchise has medical personnel that wouldn't be suitable for some High School teams. SMH -
ernest_t_bass
I don't think the trainer will be watching the play, but more focusing on concussion procedures being followed properly. Since this trainer will be an NFL trainer (hopefully no bias) they will make sure the teams don't try to bypass the rule, just to get the QB back in. Teams have, do, and will continue to abuse players with concussions, and it happens at every single level.THE4RINGZ;1022778 wrote:I like the rule. Player safety is important. But one guy to watch all eleven players on the field during each play seems a little bit overwhelming. -
Con_Alma
This is more reasonable to me. Teams should have a responsibility to protect the players as much as reasonably possible. If they don't penalties should ensue.ernest_t_bass;1022948 wrote:I don't think the trainer will be watching the play, but more focusing on concussion procedures being followed properly. Since this trainer will be an NFL trainer (hopefully no bias) they will make sure the teams don't try to bypass the rule, just to get the QB back in. Teams have, do, and will continue to abuse players with concussions, and it happens at every single level.
Asking a doctor to determine if a particular play should keep a player out is ridiculous. Asking a doctor to determine if a player is able or unable to play after he is evaluated should be happening now. -
SportsAndLady
Yeah, well, thanks to Pittsburgh, America now has an AIDS problem. So yall fucked that one upthavoice;1022833 wrote:Another rule because of the browns idiocy. The other is at games when the vendors have to take the caps off your drinks because of the time their fans pelted the officials with full bottles of beer/pop/water. -
sportchamppsIt will be interesting the first time an important player is taken off the field for a big play only to not have a concussion.
-
SonofanumpI know it is different comparing NFL paid players with NCAA student athletes, but if we sent a player off the field for a possible/suspected concussion, he is not returning to the field without clearance from a medical professional. We don’t have a problem with it, just give us in writing that he is ok, and back onto the field he goes…
-
Heretic
Problem? That shit weeds out the weak, dude!SportsAndLady;1023040 wrote:Yeah, well, thanks to Pittsburgh, America now has an AIDS problem. So yall fucked that one up -
DeyDurkie5Want to get rid of aids? Lterally kill everyone who has it, problem solved. dispose of the disease for the greater good of america.
-
BR1986FBKind of surprised that the Browns received no punishment for this. In his official statement Roger Goodell said "we didn't feel that punishing the Browns for their negligence was necessary as watching a Pat Shurmur devised offense is punishment enough."
-
thavoice
Didnt they have two other guys they already ruled out during the game with concussions? I bet the NFL took that into consideration, as at least there is an argument the browns could use that yes they DO follow protocol but just missed the one with ColtBR1986FB;1023874 wrote:Kind of surprised that the Browns received no punishment for this. In his official statement Roger Goodell said "we didn't feel that punishing the Browns for their negligence was necessary as watching a Pat Shurmur devised offense is punishment enough."