Defending The Defenseless

AP Photos/Miles Kennedy

It is a penalty that has now feels to be called almost as much as holding, “unnecessary roughness- hit on a defenseless player.” Allow me to get this caveat out of the way immediately, I do believe that the NFL is trying to do the right thing in regards to concussions and in regards of protecting their players but I have an issue with how this rule is broadly called. It seems to be that on a “bang-bang play” the defensive player is always at fault for helmet-to-helmet contact. I think that the NFL needs to get more realistic about what the expectations of an NFL defensive back are in order to make the game closer to fair for both sides of the ball.

I was never an offensive threat in any of the sports I played. I didn’t score a single goal in my high school soccer career and only hit one homer in my little league baseball career… during practice. The result of all these things lead me to be more of a defensive player and feels more for the defensive players than for the offensive guys. This may color my opinion of the calls that we see throughout the NFL today but I still think that there is something that the Commissioner’s office and the owners need to look at when they go through potential rule changes during this coming off-season.

Jared Wickerham/Getty Image

So what’s the problem you may ask? I have a problem with the way the rule is worded. The definition includes this line, “who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a runner,” and this may seem all fine and good but it isn’t. I think that referees in this league has too broad of a window for “has not had time to protect himself,” and also that whole concept is a problem. You often see receivers getting hit in the head while taking the effort to protect themselves against the hit. The natural reaction to someone like Ed Reed coming directly at you is to make yourself as small as possible, to brace for impact and a lot of that is also to bring your head into your body which causes your head to be where your body used to be as Ed Reed hits you. Yes, it is bad for Ed Reed to also hit you in the head with his own head but there is a serious problem with the fact that the natural reactions of both players results in a 15-yard penalty against the defense.

What is the answer here? I don’t know. It’s unfair for the offensive player to not allow them to protect themselves but I think that referees need to look at how the play transpired. I think that the receiver ducking his head in order to prep for contact is enough to constitute, “time to protect himself,” which will greatly decrease the number calls on seemingly unavoidable hits where the defensive player is unable to avoid the contact for which he is called.