What do others think of the new rule stating that when a ballcarrier loses his helmet, the play stops? I hate it. Two of the coolest plays I can remember in recent years involved a Packer player losing his helmet and advancing the ball. One of them was a big fullback, I can't remember his name, I think it was back in 2004 against the Redskins, picking up a first down after his helmet was knocked off. The other was James Jones in the 2008 preseason, against the Bengals. He took a big hit and his helmet got knocked off, but he stayed on his feet and scored the TD.

I can't think of a single case where the new rule would've prevented an injury. When a ballcarrier loses his helmet, he knows he lost his helmet and he's not about to stick his head into a defender. I see the new rule as strictly a public relations move, to make it look like the NFL is doing something to prevent head injuries.

Here's an article by Don Banks supporting the rule, based on the recent play with Eli Manning in which the rule did not even apply, for a couple of reasons. Dumb.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/don_banks/08/18/helmets/index.html 

---

Of course, there was also that preseason play in which James Jones emerged from a pileup of defenders without his helmet and ran the ball in for a touchdown.

What bothers me most about this play is twofold: First, it unnecessarily interrupts the natural flow of play. Second, it opens the door to defenders (or in the case of a turnover, offensive players) pulling off their helmets in a last-ditch effort to save a touchdown. Of course, officials would then throw an unsportsmanlike conduct flag, but I'd trade a 15-yard penalty for a touchdown any day.

I hope there are enough abuses of this rule that it is overturned quickly.

---

A defender wouldn't be a ball carrier, at least not in a situation where they would want to remove their helmet to stop the play.

Players are normally careful about clean tackles when someone loses their helmet. Nobody wants to kill another player or do brain damage to them. I don't know how I feel about this rule...

---

Excellent point.

I don't go as far as some as saying that we should get rid of helmets altogether, but this kind of rule is silly.

Really, all it is is the NFL doing a bit of PR to say it's serious about head injuries.

---

I was saying that in the case of an interception or offensive fumble and recovery by the defense, an offensive lineman might pull off his helmet to stop the play if it looks like the ball will be returned for a touchdown.

This rule is going to become very unpopular as soon as it foils a few scoring plays.

---

I thought the rule was limited to the ball carrier, but I'll be honest, I didn't read the entire thing in detail.

---

Ah, you're absolutely right. So the specter of other players removing their helmets to stop a play is moot. I still don't like the rule, though. Let players battle it out until the play is over.

---

I can understand the rule. All it would take is one guy getting seriously injured, and people would be (sorry for the pun) calling for the HEADS of the NFL rules commission.
And if it does prevent a serious injury, it's worth it in my opinion.

---

The problem lies, as I've said before, not in the lack of head protection but in how these guys tackle. If I tackled like these guys do when I played HS, I would have my head coach in my facemask ripping me a new one.

Here's my solution.. it'll cost some guys at first, but they'll learn.. Take the facemask off, and make the outer part of the helmet soft.

---

As with any rule there's pros and cons. But frankly with this rule I don't see many pros. I agree with Wade in that it's basically a PR move by the NFL making them look serious about head injuries.

My problem is the bit about the play being dead. There is definitely going to be a circumstance where this rule becomes controversial. For instance on James Jones play he had a clear path into the end zone once his helmet came off, but the play would have stopped there. Or more controversial, say it's a 3rd-and-eight, ball carrier takes a dump pass and gets hit, shakes it off but loses his helmet. There was easily enough room for him to get the first down, but the play is blown dead there because of the helmet, fourth down. It's bogus.

Plus why only the ball carrier? If someone else loses a helmet the play still goes on? What a linebacker lost his helmet and he swoops in to make a tackle. That's pretty damn dangerous isn't it? Or anyone on the line losing their helmets, they battle the whole frickin' play.

What the NFL really should do is work their best on making helmets that don't come off lol.

Of course, I can see coaches absolutely stressing to their players to check their helmets in between every play to make sure they won't pop off. Although, that could end up becoming an unnecessary distraction for the players.