Page 1 of 1
No More Horsecollars
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 9:48 pm
by air_hog
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The so-called "horse-collar" tackle, which came under heavy scrutiny from the NFL's powerful competition committee after Dallas Cowboys safety Roy Williams injured four players with the maneuver in 2004, was banned by the league on Tuesday.
Owners voted 27-5 to enact sanctions against the tackle. The dissenting votes were cast by Dallas, San Francisco, Detroit, New England and New Orleans. Players who use the horse-collar tackle will now be penalized 15 yards, and could be fined, as well.
"I really hate the fact that the rule is kind of being named for one player," said Atlanta Falcons team president Rich McKay, co-chairman of the competition committee. "Roy Williams is a good player and, according to the rules that existed (in 2004), he didn't do anything that was illegal. We try not to punish one player, but rather to address the future of that kind of tackle. And, as a committee, we were nervous about it."
Essentially, the horse-collar tackle was one in which a defender grabbed the inside back of a player's shoulder pads and then yanked him down from behind. The competition committee, in reviewing videotapes from last season, concluded the horse-collar tackle resulted in six serious injuries. Williams was the perpetrator in four major incidents, the most notable of which sidelined Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver Terrell Owens for the final two games of the regular season and the first two playoff contests.
Williams could not be reached on Tuesday, but last week, in discussing the possible sanctions, termed the rule "crazy."
Cowboys owner Jerry Jones voted against the change, saying he was concerned about ambiguities in the new rule. A 15-yard penalty will be called only if the tackle immediately brings the ball carrier down, and only if he's in open field.
"I'd rather it had been a fine and it not gotten to the penalty phase," Jones told The Associated Press.
In other developments at the league meeting, it appeared that the potential sale of the Minnesota Vikings to a group headed by New Jersey real estate magnate Zygmunt Wilf will not be acted upon at this session. The league's finance committee is expected to pass a resolution favoring the sale, but there remains some work to be completed between Wilf and current Minnesota owner Red McCombs before the deal can be consummated.
"I think it's just a matter of timing," said Kansas City Chiefs owner Lamar Hunt. "In any sale of this magnitude, there are a lot of issues to get through, a lot of things for the attorneys to hammer out. I didn't hear anything in the meetings that would lead me to believe that this sale won't be completed."
Wilf was expected to arrive in Washington on Tuesday night, according to The Associated Press. If the sale isn't approved Wednesday, it could be done by electronic vote by the owners at a later date.
"I don't see any roadblocks," Benson said.
I think I remember Sean pulling a few "Roy Williams" last year...
But I guess this is good. While I think football should be a contact sport, and if your on the field, anything goes, that tackle has about a 50% chance of injury.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 9:55 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
This is such a sensitive topic...
In a way I think anything should go but on the other hand peoples lives and careers are on the line all the time. I believe that the most extreme and uneeded actions should be evaluated on an individual basis to make the game "safer" to play while containing its entegrity as a violent sport. These guys are here for our entertainment and I'd hate for anyone to get hurt. If there is something that people can stop doing to save a life or a career I can live with it.
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 1:56 am
by Irn-Bru
Every rule change that restricts defenses makes me cringe.
I want people to be as safe as possible in the sport.
The two conflict.
I'm not happy, but if they really feel that this is necessary, then so be it. . .health and safety have to be the priority.
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 4:30 am
by General Failure
If this forces position coaches to teach proper tackling I'm willing to accept it.
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 9:54 am
by JansenFan
I heard next year they will restrict any tackle unless the defensive player asked permission for the referee, the opposing player and both coaches.

Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 11:22 am
by REDEEMEDSKIN
General Failure wrote:If this forces position coaches to teach proper tackling I'm willing to accept it.
I completely agree, GF. 
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 11:29 am
by JansenFan
I disagree, only in the fact that if a player is willing to learn technique from a position coach, he likely already has learned proper tackling technique.
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 1:05 pm
by Primetime42
General Failure wrote:If this forces position coaches to teach proper tackling I'm willing to accept it.
Sorry GF, but that kind of tackling has been attempted by everyone that ever got put behind a ball carrier. Roy Williams just happens to be one of few guys strong enough to bring TO down with it.
I understand the concern, but the layout of this rule is stupid. There's going to be a lot of senseless calls for a 15 yard penalty next year.
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 4:02 pm
by ejay183
I hate all these defensive restrictions now, first it was the 5 yard contact rule, now its the horse collar tackle. That tackle has saved games, but one bum safety who always gets beat, messes it up for everyone
Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 4:17 pm
by Redskins Rule
ejay183 wrote:I hate all these defensive restrictions now, first it was the 5 yard contact rule, now its the horse collar tackle. That tackle has saved games, but one bum safety who always gets beat, messes it up for everyone

I couldn't have said it any better myself.
Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 2:14 am
by batman2k5
thank gosh , now roy williams is just going to suck, lol
Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 3:19 am
by SkinsFanInHawai'i
I don't think this type of tackle is worse then grabbing a player by his dreads. I remember when Williams was complaining about that and they said it was considered part of his uniform. I guess tackling a player by his hair does not apply to everyone though.
Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 12:22 pm
by Irn-Bru
I've been down from work the past couple of days, and have spent my time watching Skins tapes from this past year.
Does anyone else remember the Eagles game where McNabb went scrambling, and was pulled down by Sean Taylor just before the 1st down marker (though the refs awarded the Eagles the first down with what was--in my opinion--a terrible spot)?
Technically, I believe, that was a horse collar tackle--but Taylor had no other way to bring McNabb down as quickly as he did. It would be one thing if they were planning on just tacking on a financial penalty for tackling like that (I still wouldn't like it), but under these new rules the Eagles would have been moved half the distance to the goal.
All because Taylor had to make a tackle from behind? How else was he supposed to do it?
I'm all for safety, but this new rule is really starting to make me wonder. . .
Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 12:33 pm
by JansenFan
I agree completely FFA. If we wanted all-out offense, we would watch arena football.
Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 10:45 am
by Primetime42
ejay183 wrote:I hate all these defensive restrictions now, first it was the 5 yard contact rule, now its the horse collar tackle. That tackle has saved games, but one bum safety who always gets beat, messes it up for everyone
The TO one was the only one where the offensive player actually got behind him. Don't know if you realized, but TO's pretty good at doing that to DB's.
When he injured Calico, it was on the sideline. Smith and Lewis were in the backfield.
Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 8:11 pm
by air_hog
As long as the Refs. use commong sense with this play, I'm fine.
I mean if like FFA said, you need to make a Horsecollar to save a First Down (even though I think the stupid refs. gave McNabb the 1st) it should not be a penalty.
But if the defender purposely lets the ball carrier get in front of him so he can yank him down, thats where you get slapped with the penalty.
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:20 pm
by Countertrey
Crap.
Just another way for officials to determine the outcome of a game.
For those of us who feel that Defense is the best part of football, this is just another screwover. This sucks.
This doesn't just effect DB's that have been "beaten". It will get LB's as they dive for the RB who is trying to turn the corner.
It's going to pad a lot of scat backs numbers.