Florio Watch

I love reading articles by Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk.com. Sometimes it's for the right reasons. Mostly it's for the wrong reasons. Not only does Florio seem to have his head firmly entrenched in Roger Goodells butt most of the time, but he also revels in attacking ESPN (nothing to do with being an NBC employee of course) and is constantly harping on about bad journalism etc. His favourite gig at the minute seems to be talking about how dirty some of the players are (especially if they play for the Steelers) for making helmet-to-helmet contact in games. Florio basically loves the new emphasis on heavy fines and suspensions for hitting defenseless receivers. He also enjoys telling everyone that they don't understand the rules. He smugly (I know the feeling) claims that everyone else is wrong and harps on about how the rules haven't changed, it's just the greater emphasis being placed on the rule etc. Which is why I found what you're about to read so very enjoyable. See, in his Monday 10-pack Florio mentioned the two big helmet-to-helmet hits that occurred this week. One he was right to complain about; the hit by Packers safety Nick Collins on Roy Williams. That hit was nothing but illegal. There was no excuse for how late and deliberate it was. But Austin Collie getting jammed between the combination of Philadelphia safeties Kurt Coleman and Quintin Mikell was a completely legitimate play. The league seems to agree, as IndyStar.com reports that the League will take no further action against them. Florio doesn't though, saying in his 10-pack article; "Still, both hits violated the rules, despite the protests of a pair of Collie's Colts teammates." I'm not sure whether he meant Collie's teammates or not, but that's not important. The rules were not broken and the league seems to understand that. Having had a private rant to myself, I put this one away in the back of my mind. That might help explain the twitching from that region which occurred when I read this article from Florio which he posted approximately 12 hours later, specifically this section: "It definitely makes no sense because it was presented with a flawed premise. When a "ball carrier" ducks his head at the last minute and absorbs a shoulder or a helmet to the head, it's not a violation of the rules. A "ball carrier" isn't a "defenseless player." A "ball carrier" therefore assumes the risk of getting hit in the head when he lowers his head just before impact. I started to write an item explaining how ESPN's chronic ignorance of the rules and their nuances is doing a disservice to the fans and, ultimately, to the game. But then it was mentioned that Commissioner Roger Goodell would be talking with Tafoya........ ......... Then came the money question. The "ball carrier" dipping his head question. The opportunity for Goodell to clarify for ESPN and anyone else who doesn't understand the difference between a helmet-to-helmet hit on a "ball carrier" and a "defenseless receiver." " (No additional smugness added) Wait a minute? ESPN's chronic ignorance of the rules and their nuances? Doing a disservice to the fans? The opportunity to clarify for ESPN and anyone else who doesn't understand the difference between blah, de, blah. Busted Florio!! Having claimed such a high horse that it could practically straddle Mount Everest, Florio then proceeded to switch places with the ass. Just 12 hours previously Florio was telling us all how bad the hit on Collie was and how it was illegal etc. The league disagreed, not fining the players in question. And by Florios very definition -- Collie had caught the ball and taken several steps -- he was no longer a defenseless receiver. He was a "ball carrier" and thus the hit was perfectly good. Having told us all in superbly arrogant fashion how chronically ignorant of the rules we all are, Florio himself appears to have missed this one. An apology maybe Florio? I very much doubt it. That might take a shred of humbleness I guess. Have a great day everyone.

An inch is as good as a mile

So, in response to the rising tide of public angst over the tougher enforcement of the rule covering "hitting a defenseless receiver", the league sent out a video to all 32 teams to demonstrate the difference between what is legal and what is illegal. In order to help fans identify these hits, they also posted the video onto NFL.com. Here is the link to video if you fancy a watch. What strikes me immediately is the supreme ridiculousness of what we're watching. The difference between the legal hits and the illegal hits is a matter of about 4 inches. If you have a few seconds, I have designed an interesting exercise for you (providing that -- like me --you find these kind of things interesting): 1. Hold your closed fist up in front of your neck, thumb side towards you. 2. Extend the index finger only and place it on the tip of your chin. 3. Now extend the thumb out to touch your chest. 4. Keeping the head upright, reach down as far as you can with your thumb, without removing the index finger from your chin. 5. Now hold that finger position and hold your hand up to observe the distance. Depending on how tall you are (or flexible) the tip of your thumb and the tip of your index finger should be approximately 4-5 inches apart. This provides you with a great visual representation of how much leeway NFL players have. 4 to 5 inches. We'll forget about players running around at high speed. We'll forget about the size of the pads and helmets being used. Exclude all other factors. That is your basic margin for error. Enjoy that NFL players. How in the name of god is this going to work? If you do the experiment again with your fingers, but now curl your upper body forward, tucking the head and rounding the shoulders, you should find that your thumb now reaches down all the way to your stomach (it helps if you have a reasonably ample mid section like me). See the difference? An offensive player hunches over as he makes the catch and now that shot to the chest is going to strike him dead plumb on the head. Hlemt to helmet contact. How are you supposed to stop that as a defensive player? You follow the leagues advice, you do exactly what they tell you and then boom... fine. All because the offensive guy ducked. Notice as well that during the video the narrator emphasised that it's going to be the responsibility of the defensive players to judge and control where they hit. Basically this is nipping any hint that offensive players should be held culpable in the bud. Now I know that every time the league changes a rule or calls for stricter enforcement of an existing one, that there is always uproar and talk of the game going into decline. The trouble with the league is that they've got so used to hearing this they seem to feel that it is simply hot air. But if I was in the league office I would be distinctly uneasy. When have you ever known the league to respond to public backlash by posting a demonstration video on the web, desperately trying to emphasise that football will retain its tough nature? I for one, am worried. With the culmination of factors building, this one could be the straw that breaks many backs. Have a great day everyone (and mind your head).